


age ani, "ar ae 


DUKE 
UNIVERSITY 


DIVINITY SCHOOL 
LIBRARY 





~~ s 
a 


— 
pe ae 
Sh Pee 
© nee me 
ee 
=, 











THE EXPOSITOR’S BIBLE. 


This series will contain Expository Lectures ON ALL THE 
BOOKS OF THE BIBLE by the foremost Preachers and Theo- 
logians of the Day. The volumes are adafted to herite-s readers 

uite as much as to the Clergy. Six vols. published a year. 
Sere 8vo., about 450 pages each, strongly bound. Price to Sué- 
scribers, cash in advance, for either series of six volumes, $6, 


Lf sent by mail is cents for each volume required to postage. 
All three series sent by Express, Vrepalt tee $18. 


rm 
(Separate vols. sent for $1.50, postpaid.) 


1890. 
JUDGES AND RUTH. By Rev. R. A. Watson, M.A, 


THE PROPHECIES OF JEREMIAH. By Rev. C. J. Bart, 
of the ** Speakers’ Commentary.” 


THE PROPHECIES OF ISAIAH. Vol. II. Completing the 
Work. By Rev. Georce ADAM SMITH. 


THE GOSPEL OF MATTHEW. By Rev. J. Monro Gipson, 
D.D., Author of ** The Mosaic Era,” etc. 


THE BOOK OF EXODUS. By Very Rev. G. A. Cuapwick. 
THE GOSPEL OF ST. LUKE. By Rev. H. Burton. 


1888-89. 

THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. Ry Rev. Prof. G. 
G. Finptay, B.A., Headingley College, Leeds. 

THE BOOK OF ISAIAH. Chap. I. to XXXIX. By Rev. 
Grorce ApAM SMITH. 

THE PASTORAL EPISTLES. By Rev. ALFrep PLumBER, 
D.D., Master of University College, Durham. 

THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS. By 
Rev. Professor Marcus Dons, D.D. 

THE REVELATION OF ST. JOHN. By Rev. Professor 
W. Mixuican, D.D., of University of Aberdeen. 


THE EPISTLES OF ST. JOHN. By Right Rev. W. ALex- 
anper, D.D., D.C.L., Lord Bishop of Derry and Raphoe. 


1887-88. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE COLOSSIANS. By ALEXANDER 
Macvaren, D.D., of Manchester. 


THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MARK. By Rev. 
Prebendary G. A. Cuapwicx, D.D., Dean of Armagh. 


THE BOOK OF GENESIS. By Rev. Marcus Dons, D.D. 


THE FIRST BOOK OF SAMUEL. By Rev. Professor W. 
G, Biaixte, D.D., LL.D. 


THE SECOND BOOK OF SAMUEL. By thesame Author. 


THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. By Rev. Principal 
T. C. Epwarps. 


Descriptive circular with critical notices sent on application by 


A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 714 Broadway, New York. 











THE 


EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


BY THE REV, PROFESSOR 
G. G. FINDLAY, B.A, 


SLEADINGLEY COLLEGE, LEEDS. 


48635 


NEW YORK: 
A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON, 
714, BROADWAY. 





a 4 of ay E& 
CONTENTS. 
THE PROLOGUE. 
CuarteErR i. I—IO, 
CHAPTER I. 
PAGE 
THE ADDRESS e = - - = - s e = 3 
CHAPTER fi 
1hmE SALUTATIVUN - - - = ah s . ° 19 


CHAPTER III. 


1HE ANATHEMA = © © 2 2#© © s& © e© 34 


THE PERSONAL HISTORY. 


CHAPTER i, II—il. 21. 


CHAPTER IV. 

PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST - ahh at Se » 53 
CHAPTER V. 

PAUL’S DIVINE COMMISSION - - . = - 68 


AS bss 


3 


CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER VL 


PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH = - 


CHAPTER VIL 


PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN - 


CHAPTER VIII. 


PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS - ~ = 


CHAPTER IX. 


PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH = - . 


CHAPTER X, 
THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE - - « 


THE DOCTRINAL POLEMIC. 


CBHAPIER iii, b-—v. 12. 


CHAPTER XL 


THE GALATIAN FOLLY ~ > - - 


CHAPTER XII. 


ABRAHAM’S BLESSING AND THE LAW'S CURSE 


CHAPTER XIIL 


THE COVENANT OF PROMISE - ° = 


CHAPTER XIV. 


“THE DESIGN OF THE LAW - - - = 





PAGE 


2113 


- 146 


+ 165 


- 211 


CONTENTS. vii 


i 


CHAPTER XV. 


_—— THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD - 2 2 a = 227 


CHAPTER XVI. 


THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE =P eee wal oy A we | 5942 


CHAPTER XVII. 


THE RETURN TO BONDAGE - = - - * = = 257 


CHAPTER XVIII. 


PAUL'S ENTREATY = - - - - e ° = 272 


CHAPTER XIX. 


THE STORY OF HAGAR = ee ke eae - 286 


CHAPTER XX, 


SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED ? 302 


CHAPTER XXI. 


THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS - - - 2 - 316 


THE ETHICAL APPLICATION. 


CuHarTER v. 13—vi. 10. 


CHAPTER XXII 


THE PERILS OF LIBERTY - - = = - - - 333 


CHAPTER XXIIL 


CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH - = = - - 347 


viii CONTENTS. 


CHAPTER XXIV. 


THE WORKS OF THE FLESH - - - - 


‘ 


CHAPTER XXV. 


THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT - - - - - 


‘ 


CHAPTER XXVL 


OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN <= - od 


CHAPTER XXVIL. 


SOWING AND REAPING - - - - ~ - 


THE EPILOGUE. 


CuapTER vi. 11—18, 


CHAPTER XXVIIL 


THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING - ~ - 


CHAPTER XXIX. 


RITUAL NOTHING: CHARACTER EVERYTHING - - 


CHAPTER XXX. 


THE BRAND OF JESUS - - - - - - 


~ 375 


- 390 


= 405 


LE PROLOGUE. 


CuaPTerR i, I—IO, 





CHAPTER L 
THE ADDRESS. 


“Paul, an apostle (not from men, neither through man, but through 
Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised Him from the dead), 
and all the brethren which are with me, unto the Churches of Galatia.” * 
—GAL. i. I, 2. 


NTIQUITY has nothing to show more notable in 

its kind, or more precious, than this letter of Paul 
to the Churches of Galatia. It takes us back, in some 
respects nearer than any other document we possess, 
to the beginnings of Christian theology and the 
Christian Church. In it the spiritual consciousness 
of Christianity first reveals itself in its distinctive 
character and its full strength, free from the trammels 
of the past, realizing the advent of the new kingdom 
of God that was founded in the death of Christ. It 
is the voice of the Church testifying ‘God hath sent 
forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts.” Buried 
for a thousand years under the weight of the Catholic 
legalism, the teaching of this Epistle came to life again 
in the rise of Protestantism. Martin Luther put it 
to his lips as a trumpet to blow the reveillé of the 
Reformation. His famous Commentary summoned 
enslaved Christendom to recover “the liberty wherewith 


* The text used in this exposition is, with very few exceptions, that 
of the Revised English Version, or its margin. 


4 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Christ hath made us free.” Of all the great Reformer’s 
writings this was the widest in its influence and the 
dearest to himself. For the spirit of Paul lived again 
in Luther, as in no other since the Apostle’s day. 
The Epistle to the Galatians is the charter of Evan- 
gelical faith. 

The historical criticism of the present century has 
brought this writing once more to the front of the 
conflict of faith. Born in controversy, it seems inevit- 
ably to be born fer controversy. Its interpretation 
forms the pivot of the most thoroughgoing recent dis- 
cussions touching the beginnings of Christian history 
and the authenticity of the New Testament record 
The Galatian Epistle is, in fact, the key of New Testa- 
ment Apologetics. Round it the Roman and Corinthian 
Letters group themselves, forming together a solid, 
impregnable quaternion, and supplying a fixed starting- 
point and an indubitable test for the examination of the 
critical questions belonging to the Apostolic age. What- 
ever else may be disputed, it is agreed that there was 
an apostle Paul, who wrote these four Epistles to certain 
Christian societies gathered out of heathenism, com- 
munities numerous, widely scattered, and containing 
men of advanced intelligence; and this within thirty 
years of the death of Jesus Christ. Every critic must 
reckon with this fact. The most sceptical criticism 
makes a respectful pause before our Epistle. Hopeless 
of destroying its testimony, Rationalism treats it with 
an even exaggerated deference ; and seeks to extract 
evidence from it against its companion witnesses amongst 
the New Testament writings. This attempt, however 
misdirected, is a signal tribute to the importance of the 
document, and to the force with which the personality 
of the writer and the conditions of the time have 


ee THE ADDRESS. 5 


stamped themselves upon it. The deductions of the 
Baurian criticism appear to us to rest on a narrow 
and arbitrary examination of isolated passages; they 
spring from a mistaken @ priori view of the historical 
situation. Granting however to these inferences, 
which will meet us as we proceed, their utmost 
weight, they still leave the testimony of Paul to the 
supernatural character of Christianity substantially 
intact. 

Of the four major Epistles, this one is superlatively 
characteristic of its author. It is Paulinissema Paul- 
tmarum—most Pauline of Pauline things. It is largely 
autobiographical ; hence its peculiar value. Reading 
it, we watch history in the making. We trace the rise 
of the new religion in the typical man of the epoch. 
The master-builder of the Apostolic Church stands 
before us, at the crisis of his work. He lets us look 
into his heart, and learn the secret of his power. We 
come to know the Apostle Paul as we know scarcely 
any other of the world’s great minds. We find in him 
a man of the highest intellectual and spiritual powers, 
equally great in passion and in action, as a thinker 
and a leader of men. But at every step of our 
acquaintance the Apostle points us beyond himself; he 
says, “It is not I: it is Christ that lives in me.” If 
this Epistle teaches us the greatness of Paul, it teaches 
us all the more the Divine greatness of Jesus Christ, 
before whom that kingly intellect and passionate heart 
bowed in absolute devotion. 

The situation which the Epistle reveals and the 
personal references in which it abounds are full of 
interest at every point. They furnish quite essential 
data to the historian of the Early Church. We could 
wish that the Apostle, telling us so much, had told us 


6 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





more. His allusions, clear enough, we must suppose, 
to the first readers, have lent themselves subsequently 
to very conflicting interpretations. But as they stand, 
they are invaluable. The fragmentary narrative of the 
Acts requires, especially in its earlier sections, all the 
illustration that can be obtained from other sources. 
The conversion of Paul, and the Council at Jerusalem, 
events of capital importance for the history of Apostolic 
times, are thereby set in a light certainly more complete 
and satisfactory than is furnished in Luke’s narrative, 
taken by itself. And Paul’s references to the Judean 
Church and its three “pillars,” touch the crucial question 
of New Testament criticism, namely that concerning 
the relation of the Gentile Apostle to Jewish Christianity 
and the connection between his theology and the teach- 
ing of Jesus. Our judgement respecting the conflict 
between Peter and Paul at Antioch in particular will 
determine our whole conception of the legalist con- 
troversy, and consequently of the course of Church 
history during the first two centuries. Around these 
cursory allusions has gathered a contest only less 
momentous than that from which they sprung. 

The personal and the doctrinal element are equally 
prominent in this Epistle ; and appear in a combination 
characteristic of the writer. Paul’s theology is the 
theology of experience. ‘It pleased God,” he says, 
“to reveal His Son in me” (ch. i. 16). His teaching 
is cast in a psychological mould. It is largely a record 
of the Apostle’s spiritual history; it is the expression 
of a living, inward process—a personal appropriation 
of Christ, and a growing realization of the fulness of 
the Godhead in Him. The doctrine of Paul was as far 
as possible removed from being the result of abstract 
deduction, or any mere combination of data externally 


i 1,2] THE ADDRESS. 7 


given. In his individual consciousness, illuminated by 
the vision of Christ and penetrated by the Spirit of 
God, he found his message for the world. ‘“ We believe, 
and therefore speak. We have received the Spirit of 
God, that we may know the things freely given us of 
God :” sentences like these show us very clearly how 
the Apostle’s doctrine formed itself in his mind. His 
apprehension of Christ, above all of the cross, was the 
focus, the creative and governing centre, of all his 
thoughts concerning God and man, time and eternity. 
In the light of this knowledge he read the Old Testa- 
ment, he interpreted the earthly life and teaching of 
Jesus. On the ground of this personal sense of salvation 
he confronted Peter at Antioch; on the same ground 
he appeals to the vacillating Galatians, sharers with 
himself in the new life of the Spirit. Here lies the 
nerve of his argument in this Epistle. The theory of 
the relation of the Law to the Abrahamic promise 
developed in the third chapter, is the historical counter- 
part of the relation of the legal to the evangelical 
consciousness, as he had experienced the two states 
in turn within his own breast. The spirit of Paul was 
a microcosm, in which the course of the world’s 
religious evolution was summed up, and brought to 
the knowledge of itself. 

The Apostle’s influence over the minds of others was 
due in great part to the extraordinary force with which 
he apprehended the facts of his own spiritual nature. 
Through the depth and intensity of his personal ex- 
perience he touched the experience of his fellows, he 
seized on those universal truths that are latent in the 
consciousness of mankind, “by manifestation of the 
truth commending himself to every man’s conscience 
in the sight of God.” But this knowledge of the things 


8 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


of God was not the mere fruit of reflection and self- 
searching ; it was “the ministration of the Spirit.” 
Paul did not simply now Christ; he was one with 
Christ, ‘‘joined to the Lord, one spirit” with Him. 
He did not therefore speak out of the findings of his 
own spirit ; the absolute Spirit, the Spirit of truth and 
of Christ, spoke in him. Truth, as he knew it, was 
the self-assertion of a Divine life. And so this handful 
of old letters, broken and casual in form, with their 
“rudeness of speech,” their many obscurities, their 
rabbinical logic, have stirred the thoughts of men and 
swayed their lives with a power greater perhaps than 
belongs to any human utterances, saving only those 
of the Divine Master. 

The features of Paul’s style show themselves here in 
their most pronounced form. ‘The style is the man.” 
And the whole man is in this letter. Other Epistles 
bring into relief this or that quality of the Apostle’s 
disposition and of his manner as a writer; here all are 
present. The subtlety and trenchant vigour of Pauline 
dialectic are nowhere more conspicuous than in the 
discussion with Peter in ch. ii. The discourse on 
Promise and Law in ch. iii. is a master-piece of 
exposition, unsurpassed in its keenness of insight, 
breadth of view, and skill of application. Such passages 
as ch. i, 15, 16; ii. 19, 20; vi. 14, take us into the 
heart of the Apostle’s teaching, and reveal its mystical 
depth of intuition. Behind the masterful dialectician 
we find the spiritual seer, the man of contemplation, 
whose fellowship is with the eternal and unseen. And 
the emotional temperament of the writer has left its 
impress on this Epistle not less distinctly than his 
mental and spiritual gifts. The denunciations of ch. i. 
6—10; ii. 4, 5; iv. 93 v. 7—I2; vi. 12—14, burn 


i, 1, 2.] THE ADDRESS. 9 
with a concentrated intensity of passion, a sublime and 
holy scorn against the enemies of the cross, such as 
a nature like Paul’s alone is capable of feeling. Nor 
has the Apostle penned anything on the other hand 
more amiable and touching, more winningly frank and 
tender in appeal, than the entreaty of ch. iv. I11—20. 
His last sentence, in ch. vi. 17, is an irresistible stroke 
of pathos. The ardour of his soul, his vivacity of mind 
and quick sensibility, are apparent throughout. Those 
sudden turns of thought and bursts of emotion that 
occur in all his Epistles and so much perplex their 
interpreters, are especially numerous in this. And 
yet we find that these interruptions are never allowed 
to divert the writer from his purpose, nor to destroy 
the sequence of his thought. They rather carry it 
forward with greater vehemence along the chosen 
course, as storms will a strong and well-manned ship. 
The Epistle is strictly a unity. It is written, as one 
might say, at a single breath, as if under pressure and 
in stress of mind. There is little of the amplitude 
of expression and the delight in lingering over some 
favourite idea that characterize the later Epistles. Nor 
is there any passage of sustained eloquence to compare 
with those that are found in the Roman and Corinthian 
letters. The business on which the Apostle writes is 
too urgent, his anxiety too great, to allow of freedom 
and discursiveness of thought. Hence this Epistle is 
to an unusual degree closely packed in matter, rapid in 
movement, and severe in tone. 

In its construction the Epistle exhibits an almost 
dramatic character. It is full of action and animation. 
There is a gradual unfolding of the subject, and a skil- 
ful combination of scene and incident brought to bear 
on the solution of the crucial question. The Apostle 


10 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
himself, the insidious Judaizers, and the wavering 
Galatians,—these are the protagonists of the action; 
with Peter and the Church at Jerusalem playing a 
secondary part, and Abraham and Moses, Isaac and 
Ishmael, appearing in the distance. The first Act 
conducts us rapidly from scene to scene till we behold 
Paul labouring amongst the Gentiles, and the Churches 
of Judea listening with approval to the reports of his 
success. The Council of Jerusalem opens a new stage 
in the history. Now Gentile liberties are at stake; 
but Titus’ circumcision is successfully resisted, and 
Paul as the Apostle of the Uncircumcised is acknow- 
ledged by “the pillars” as their equal; and finally 
Peter, when he betrays the truth of the Gospel at 
Antioch, is corrected by the Gentile Apostle. The 
third chapter carries us away from the present con- 
flict into the region of first principles,—to the Abrahamic 
Covenant with its spiritual blessing and world-wide 
promise, opposed by the condemning Mosaic Law, an 
opposition finally resolved by the coming of Christ and 
the gift of His Spirit of adoption. At this point the 
Apostle turns the gathered force of his argument upon 
his readers, and grapples with them front to front in 
the expostulation carried on from ch. iv. 8 to v. 12, 
in which the story of Hagar forms a telling episode. 
The fifth and closing Act, extending to the middle of 
ch. vi., turns on the antithesis of Flesh and Spirit, 
bringing home the contention to the region of ethics, 
and exhibiting to the Galatians the practical effect of 
their following the Pauline or the Judaistic leadership. 
Paul and the Primitive Church; Judaism and Gentile- 
Christian liberties ; the Covenants of Promise and of 
Law; the circumcision or non-circumcision of the 
Galatians ; the dominion of Flesh or Spirit: these are 


2 - THE ADDRESS. II 





the contrasts through which the Epistle advances. Its 
centre lies in the decisive question given in the fourth 
of these antitheses. If we were to fix it in a single 
point, ver. 2 of ch. v. is the sentence we should 
choose :— 

“Behold, I Paul say unto you, 

If ye be circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing.” 

The above analysis may be reduced to the common 
threefold division, followed in this exposition :—viz. 
(1) Personal History, ch. i. 11—ii. 21 ; (2) Doctrinal 
Polemic, ch. iii. I—v. 12; (3) Ethical Application, ch. 
v. 13—vi. 10. 

The epistolary Introduction forms the Prologue, ch. 
i. I—10; and an Epilogue is appended, by way of 
renewed warning and protestation, followed by the 
concluding signature and benediction,—ch. vi. 11—18. 


The Address occupies the first two verses of the 
Epistle. 

I. On the one side is the writer: “ Paul, an Apostle.” 
In his earliest Letters (to Thessalonica) the title is 
wanting; so also in Philippians and Philemon. The 
last instance explains the othertwo. Tothe Macedonian 
Churches Paul writes more in the style of friendship 
than authority: “for love’s sake he rather entreats.” 
With the Galatians it is different. He proceeds to 
define his apostleship in terms that should leave no 
possible doubt respecting its character and rights: 
“not from men,” he adds, “nor through man; but 
through Jesus Christ, and God the Father, that raised 
Him from the dead.” 

This reads like a contradiction of some statement 
made by Paul's opposers. Had they insinuated that 
he was “an apostle from men,” that his office was 


12 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





derived, like their own, only from the mother Church 
in Jerusalem? Such insinuations would very well 
serve their purpose ; and if they were made, Paul would 
be sure not to lose a moment in meeting them. 

The word apfoséle had a certain latitude of meaning.* 
It was already, there is reason to believe, a term of 
Jewish official usage when our Lord applied it to His 
chosen Twelve. It signified a delegate or envoy, ac- 
credited by some public authority, and charged with a 
special message. We can understand therefore its 
application to the emissaries of particular Churches— 
of Jerusalem or Antioch, for example—despatched 
as their messengers to other Churches, or with a 
general commission to proclaim the Gospel. The 
recently discovered “Teaching of the Apostles” shows 
that this use of the title continued in Jewish-Christian 
circles to the end of the first century, alongside of the 
restricted and higher use. The lower apostleship 
belonged to Paul in common with Barnabas and Silas 
and many others. 

In the earlier period of his ministry, thé Apostle was 
seemingly content to rank in public estimation with his 
companions in the Gentile mission. But a time came 
when he was compelled to arrogate to himself the 





* Compare Acts xiv. 4, 14 (Barnabas and Paul); 1 Thess. ii. 6 
(Paul and his comrades); Rom. xvi. 7 (Andronicus and Junias) ; 
2 Cor. viii. 23 ( Zitus and others, “apostles of the churches”); 2 Cor. 
xi. 13 (“false apostles” : Judean emissaries); also Rev. ii. 2; Heb. 
iii, 1; John xiii. 16. On the N.T. use of apostle, see Lightfoot’s 
Galatians, pp. 92—101 ; but especially Huxtable’s Dissertation in the 
Pulpit Commentary (Galatians), pp. xxiii—l., the most satisfactory 
elucidation of the subject we have met with. Prebendary Huxtable 
however presses his argument too far, when he insists that St. Paul 
held his higher commission entirely in abeyance until the crisis of the 
Judaic controversy. 


i. 1, 2.] THE ADDRESS. 13 


higher dignity. His right thereto was acknowledged 
at the memorable conference in Jerusalem by the 
leaders of the Jewish Church. So we gather from the 
language of ch. ii. 7—9. But the full exercise of 
his authority was reserved for the present emergency, 
when all his energy and influence were required to 
stem the tide of the Judaistic reaction. We can well 
imagine that Paul “gentle in the midst” of his flock 
and “not seeking to be of weight” (1 Thess. ii. 6, 7), 
had hitherto said as little as need be on the subject 
of his official rights. His modesty had exposed him 
to misrepresentations both in Corinth and in Galatia. 
He will “have” these people “to know” that his 
gospel is in the strictest sense Divine, and that he 
received his commission, as certainly as any of the 
Twelve, from the lips of Jesus Christ Himself (ver. 11). 

“Not from men” excludes human derivation ; “ not: 
through man,” human intervention in the conferment 
of Paul’s office. The singular number (mam) replaces 
the plural in the latter phrase, because it stands 
immediately opposed to “ Jesus Christ” (a striking 
witness this to His Divinity). The second clause 
carries the negation farther than the first; for a call 
from God may be, and commonly is, imposed by 
human hands. There are, says Jerome, four kinds of 
Christian ministers: first, those sent neither from men 
nor through man, like the prophets of old time and the 
Apostles; secondly, those who are from God, but 
through man, as it is with their legitimate successors ; 
thirdly, those who are from men, but not from God, as 
when one is ordained through mere human favour and 
flattery ; the fourth class consists of such as have their 
call neither from God nor man, but wholly from them- 
selves, as with false prophets and the false apostles 


14 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


of whom Paul speaks. His vocation, the Apostle 
declares, was superhuman, alike in its origin and in 
the channel by which it was conveyed. It was no 
voice of man that summoned Saul of Tarsus from the 
ranks of the enemies to those of the servants of Christ, 
and gave him the message he proclaimed. Damascus 
and Jerusalem in turn acknowledged the grace given 
unto him; Antioch had sent him forth on her behalf to 
the regions beyond: but he was conscious of a call 
anterior to all this, and that admitted of no earthly 
validation. “Am I not an apostle?” he exclaims, 
“have I not seen Jesus our Lord?” (1 Cor. ix. 1). 
“ Truly the signs of the Apostle were wrought in him,” 
both in the miraculous powers attending his office, and 
in those moral and spiritual qualities of a minister of 
God in which he was inferior to none.* For the exercise 
of his ministry he was responsible neither to “ those of 
repute” at Jerusalem, nor to his censurers at Corinth ; 
but to Christ who had bestowed it (1 Cor. iv. 3, 4). 
The call of the Apostle proceeded also from “ God 
the Father, who raised Jesus Christ from the dead.” 
Christ was in this act the mediator, declaring the 
Supreme will. In other places, more briefly, he styles 
himself ‘Apostle by the will of God.” His appoint- 
ment took place by a Divine intervention, in which 
the ordinary sequence of events was broken through. 
Long after the Saviour in His bodily presence had 
ascended to heaven, when in the order of nature it was 
impossible that another Apostle should be elected, and 
when the administration of His Church had been for 
several years carried on by human hands, He appeared 
once more on earth for the purpose of making this man 


* 1 Cor xv. 10; 2 Cor. iv. 2; vi. 3—10; xi. 5, 16—xii. 13, 


rhino] THE ADDRESS. 15 





His “minister and witness;” He appeared in the 


name of “the Father, who had raised Him from the 
dead.” This interposition gave to Paul’s ministry an 
exceptional character. While the mode of his election 
was in one aspect humbling, and put him in the 
position of “the untimely one,” the “least of the 
Apostles,” whose appearance in that capacity was 
unlooked for and necessarily open to suspicion ; on the 
other hand, it was glorious and exalting, since it so 
richly displayed the Divine mercy and the transforming 
power of grace. 

But why does he say, who raised Him from the dead? 
Because it was the risen Jesus that he saw, and that he 
was conscious of seeing in the moment of the vision. 
The revelation that arrested him before Damascus, 
in the same moment convinced him that Jesus was 
risen, and that he himself was called to be His servant. 
These two convictions were inseparably linked in 
Paul’s recollections. As surely as God the Father had 
raised His Son Jesus from the dead and given Him 
glory, so surely had the glorified Jesus revealed Him- 
self to Saul his persecutor to make him His Apostle. 
He was, not less truly than Peter or John, a witness of 
His resurrection. The message of the Resurrection 
was the burden of the Apostleship. 

He adds, ‘and all the brethren which are with me.” 
For it was Paul’s custom to associate with himself in 
these official letters his fellow-labourers, present at the 
time. From this expression we gather that he was 
attended just now bya considerable band of companions, 
such as we find enumerated in Acts xx. 2—6, attending 
him on his journey from Ephesus to Corinth during 
the third missionary tour. This circumstance has 
some bearing on the date of the letter. Bishop 


16 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Lightfoot (in his Commentary) shows reason for 
believing that it was written, not from Ephesus as 
commonly supposed, but at a somewhat later time, 
from Macedonia. It is connected by numerous and 
close links of internal association with the Epistle to 
the Romans, which on this supposition speedily 
followed, and with 2 Corinthians, immediately preced- 
ing it. And the allusion of the text, though of no 
decisive weight taken by itself, goes to support this 
reasoning. Upon this hypothesis, our Epistle was 
composed in Macedonia, during the autumn of 57 
(or possibly, 58) a.p. The emotion which surcharges 
2 Corinthians runs over into Galatians: while the 
theology which labours for expression in Galatians 
finds ampler and calmer development in Romans. 

II. Of the readers, “the churches of Galatia,” it is 
not necessary to say much at present. The character 
of the Galatians, and the condition of their Churches, 
will speak for themselves as we proceed. Ga/atian is 
equivalent to Gaul, or Kelt. This people was a detached 
fragment of the great Western-European race, which 
forms the basis of our own Irish and West-British 
populations, as well as of the French nationality. 
They had conquered for themselves a home in the 
north of Asia Minor during the Gaulish invasion that 
poured over South-eastern Europe and into the Asiatic 
peninsula some three and a half centuries before. 
Here the Gallic intruders stubbornly held their ground ; 
and only succumbed to the irresistible power of Rome. 
Defeated by the Consul Manlius in 189 B.c, the 
Galatians retained their autonomy, under the rule of 
native princes, until in the year 25 B.c., on the death 
of Amyntas, the country was made a province of the 
Empire. The people maintained their distinctive 


iz) THE ADDRESS. 17 


character and speech despite these changes. At the 
same time they readily acquired Greek culture, and 
were by no means barbarians; indeed they were noted 
for their intelligence. In religion they seem to have 
largely imbibed the Phrygian idolatry of the earlier 
inhabitants. 

The Roman Government had annexed to Galatia 
certain districts lying to the south, in which were 
situated most of the cities visited by Paul and Barnabas 
in their first missionary tour. This has led some 
scholars to surmise that Paul’s “‘Galatians” were really 
Pisidians and Lycaonians, the people of Derbe, Lystra, 
and Pisidian Antioch. But this is improbable. The 
inhabitants of these regions were never called Galatians 
in common speech; and Luke distinguishes “the 
Galatic country” quite clearly from its southern border- 
lands. Besides, the Epistle contains no allusions, such 
as we should expect in the case supposed, to the 
Apostle’s earlier and memorable associations with these 
cities of the South. Elsewhere he mentions them by 
name (2 Tim. iii. 11); and why not here, if he were 
addressing this circle of Churches ? 

The Acts of the Apostles relates nothing of Paul’s 
sojourn in Galatia, beyond the fact that he twice 
“passed through the Galatic country” (Acts xvi. 6; 
xvili. 23), on the first occasion during the second 
missionary journey, in travelling north and then west- 
wards from Pisidia; the second time, on his way from 
Antioch to Ephesus, in the course of the third tour. 
Galatia lay outside the main line of Paul’s evangelistic 
career, as the historian of the Acts describes it, outside 
the Apostle’s own design, as it would appear from 
ch, iv. 13. In the first instance Galatia follows (in 
the order of the Acts), in the second precedes Phrygia, 

2 


18 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


a change which seems to indicate some new importance 
accruing to this region: the further clause in Acts 
XViii. 23, “strengthening all the disciples,” shows that 
the writer was aware tliat by this time a number of 
Christian societies were in existence in this neighbour- 
hood. 

No city is mentioned in the address, but the country of 
Galatia only—the single example of the kind in Paul’s 
Epistles. The Galatians were countryfolk rather than 
townsfolk. And the Church seems to have spread 
over the district at large, without gathering itself into 
any one centre, such as the Apostle had occupied in 
other parts of his Gentile field. 

Still more significant is the curtness of this designa- 
tion. Paul does not say, “To the Churches of God 
in Galatia,” or “to the saints and faithful brethren in 
Christ,” as in other Epistles. He is in no mood for 
compliments. These Galatians are, he fears, “remov- 
ing from God who had called them” (ver. 6). He 
stands in doubt of them. It is a question whether they 
are now, or will long continue, “Churches of God” at 
all. He would gladly commend them if he could; but 
he must instead begin with reproaches. And yet we 
shall find that, as the Apostle proceeds, his sternness 
gradually relaxes. He remembers that these “ foolish 
Galatians” are his ‘‘ children,” once ardently attached 
to him (ch. iv. 12—20). His heart yearns towards 
them; he travails over them in birth again. Surely 
they will not forsake him, and renounce the gospel of 
whose blessings they had enjoyed so rich an experience 
(ch. iii. 3; v. 10). He calls them “brethren” once 
and again; and with this kindly word, holding out the 
hand of forgiveness, he concludes the letter, 


CHAPTER II. 
THE SALUTATION. 


* Grace to you and peace from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus 
Christ, who gave Himself for our sins, that He might deliver us out of 
this present evil world, according to the will of our God and Father : 
to whom be the glory for ever and ever. Amen.”—GAL, i. 3—5. 


HE greetings and benedictions of the Apostolic 

Letters deserve more attention from us than they 
sometimes receive. We are apt to pass over them as 
if they were a kind of pious formality, like the conven- 
tional phrases of our own epistles. But to treat them 
in such fashion is to do injustice to the seriousness 
and sincerity of Holy Scripture. This salutation of 
“Grace and Peace” comes from Paul’s very heart. It 
breathes the essence of his gospel. 

This formula appears to be of the Apostle’s coining. 
Other writers, we may believe, borrowed it from him. 
Grace represents the common Greek salutation,—joy to 
you, xaipew changing to the kindred ydpis; while the 
more religious peace of the Hebrew, so often heard 
from the lips of Jesus, remains unaltered, only receiving 
from the New Covenant a tenderer significance. It is 
as though East and West, the old world and the new, 
met here and joined their voices to bless the Church 
and people of Jesus Christ. 

Grace is the.sum of all blessing bestowed by God; 


20 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

peace, in its wide Hebraic range of meaning, the sum of 
all blessing experienced by man. Grace is the Father’s 
goodwill and bounty in Christ to His undeserving 
children ; peace, the rest and reconcilement, the re- 
covered health and gladness of the child brought home 
to the Father's house, dwelling in the light ‘of his 
Father's face. Grace is the fountain of redeeming love ; 
peace is the “river of life proceeding from the throne 
of God and of the Lamb,” that flows calm and deep 
through each believing soul, the river whose “ streams 
make glad the city of God.” 

What could a pastor wish better for his people, or 
friend for the friend he loves most, than this double 
blessing ? Paul’s letters are perfumed with its fra- 
grance. Open them where you will, they are breathing 
out, “‘Grace to you and peace.” Paul has hard things 
to write in this Epistle, sorrowful complaints to make, 
grievous errors to correct; but still with “Grace and 
peace” he begins, and with “Peace and grace” he 
will end! And so this stern and reproachful letter to 
these “ foolish Galatians” is all embalmed and folded 
up in grace and peace. That is the way to “be angry 
and sin not.” So mercy rejoices over judgement. 

These two benedictions, we must remember, go 
together. Peace comes through grace. The proud 
heart never knows peace; it will not yield to God the 
glory of His grace. It scorns to be a debtor, even to 
Him. The proud man stands upon his rights, upon his 
merits, And he will have them; for God is just. But 
peace is not amongst them. No sinful child of man 
deserves that. Is there wrong between your soul and 
God, iniquity hidden in the heart? Till that wrong is 
confessed, till you submit to the Almighty and your 
spirit bows at the Redeemer’s cross, what hast thou 


i. 3-5.J THE SALUTATION. 21 


to do with peace? No peace in this world, or in any 
world, for him who will not be at peace with God. 
“When I kept silence,” so the ancient confession runs 
(Ps. xxxii. 3—5), “my bones waxed old through my 
moaning all the day long ”—that is why many a man is 
old before his time! because of this continual inward 
chafing, this secret, miserable war of the heart against 
God. ‘Day and night Thy hand was heavy upon me; 
my moisture was turned into the drought of summer ”"— 
the soul withered like grass, all the freshness and pure 
delight of life wasted and perishing under the steady, 
unrelenting heat of the Divine displeasure. “Then I 
said ”—I could bear it no longer—“I said, I will confess 
my transgression unto the Lord; and Thou forgavest 
the iniquity of my sin.” And then peace came to the 
weary soul. ‘The bitterness and hardness of life were 
gone; the heart was young again. ~The man was new 
born, a child of God. 

But while Paul gives this salutation to all his 
Churches, his greeting is extended and qualified here in 
a peculiar manner. ‘The Galatians were falling away 
from faith in Christ to Jewish ritualism. He does not 
therefore wish them “Grace and peace” in a general 
way, or as objects to be sought from any quarter 
or by any means that they might choose; but only 
“from God our Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, who 
gave Himself for our sins.” Here is already a note 
of warning and a tacit contradiction of much that they 
were tempted to believe. It would have been a mockery 
for the Apostle to desire for these fickle Galatians 
grace and peace on other terms. As at Corinth, so in 
Galatia, he is ‘determined to know nothing save Jesus 
Christ and Him crucified.” Above the puerilities of 
their Jewish ritual, above the pettiness of their wrang- 


22 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
ling factions, he directs his readers’ gaze once more to 
the sacrifice of Calvary and the sublime purpose of God 
which it reveals. 

Do we not need to be recalled to the same sight ? 
We live in a distracted and distracting age. Even witk- 
out positive unbelief, the cross is too frequently thrust 
out of view by the hurry and press of modern life. 
Nay, in the Church itself is it not in danger of being 
practically set on one side, amidst the throng of com- 
peting interests which solicit, and many of them justly 
solicit, our attention? We visit Calvary too seldom. 
We do not haunt in our thoughts the sacred spot, and 
linger on this theme, as the old saints did. We fail to 
attain “the fellowship of Christ's sufferings ;” and while 
the cross is outwardly exalted, its inward meaning is 
perhaps but faintly realised. ‘“ Tell us something new,” 
they say; “that story of the cross, that evangelical 
doctrine of yours we have heard it so often, we know 
it all so well!” If men are saying this, if the cross 
of Christ is made of none effect, its message staled by 
repetition, we must be strangely at fault either in the 
hearing or the telling. Ah, if we knew the cross of 
Christ, it would crucify us ; it would possess our being. 
Its supremacy can never be taken from it. That cross 
is still the centre of the world’s hope, the pillar of 
salvation. Let the Church lose her hold of it, and she 
loses everything. She has no longer any reason to 
exist. 

I. So the Apostle’s greeting invites his readers to 
contemplate anew the Divine gift bestowed upon sinful 
men, It invokes blessing upon them “ from our Lord 
Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for our sins.” 

To see this gift in its greatness, let us go a little 
farther back ; let us consider who the Christ is that 


i. 3-5.] THE SALUTATION. 23 


thus “gives Himself.” He is, we are taught, the 
almoner of all the Divine bounties. He is not the 
object alone, but the depositary and dispenser of the 
Father’s good pleasure to all worlds and all creatures. 
Creation is rooted in “the Son of God’s love” (Col. 
i. 15—18). Universal life has its fountain in “the 
Only-begotten, which is in the bosom of the Father.” 
The light that dispelled the weltering gloom of chaos, 
the more wondrous light that shone in the dawn of 
‘ human reason, came from this “outbeaming of the 
Father’s glory.” Countless gifts had He, ‘the life of 
men, the Word that was from the beginning,” bestowed 
on a world that knew Him not. Upon the chosen 
race, the people whom on the world’s behalf he formed 
for Himself, He showered His blessings. He had 
given them promise and law, prophet and priest and 
king, gifts of faith and hope, holy obedience and brave 
patience and deep wisdom and prophetic fire and 
heavenly rapture; and His gifts to them have come 
through them to us, “ partakers with them of the root 
and fatness of the olive tree.” 

But now, to crown all, He gave Himself! “The 
Word became flesh.” The Son of God planted Him- 
self into the stock of human life, made Himself over 
to mankind ; He became the Son of man. So in the 
fulness of time came the fulness of blessing. Earlier © 
bestowments were instalments and prophecies of this ; 
later gifts are its outcome and its application. What 
could He have done more than this? What could 
the Infinite God do more, even for the most worthy, 
than He has done for us in “sending His Son, the 
Only-begotten, that we might live through Him!” 
Giving us Him, surely He will give us grace and 
peace, 


24 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

And if our Lord Jesus Christ “gave Himself,” is 
not that sufficient? What could Jewish ritual and cir- 
cumcision add to this “fulness of the Godhead?” 
Why hunt after the shadows, when one has the 
substance? Such were the questions which the 
Apostle has to ask his Judaizing readers. And what, 
pray, do we want with modern Ritualism, and its 
scenic apparatus, and its priestly offices? Are these 
things designed to eke out the insufficiency of Christ ? 
Will they recommend Him better than His own gospel 
and the pure influence of His Spirit avail to do in these 
latter days? Or has modern thought, to be sure, 
and the progress of the 19th century carried us be- 
yond Jesus Christ, and created spiritual wants for 
which He has no supply? Paul at least had no 
anticipation of this failure. All the need of hungry 
human hearts and searching minds and sorrowing 
spirits, to the world’s latest ages, the God of Paul, the 
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, is able to supply in 
Him. ‘“ Weare complete in Him,”—if we but knew our 
completeness. The most advanced thinkers of the age 
will still find Jesus Christ in advance of them. Those 
who draw the most largely from His fulness, leave its 
depths unsounded. There are resources stored for the 
times to come in the revelation of Christ, which our age 
is too slight, too hasty of thought, to comprehend. We 
are straitened in ourselves; never in Him. 

From this supreme gift we can argue down to the 
humblest necessities, the commonest trials of our daily 
lot. It adapts itself to the small anxieties of a strug- 
gling household, equally with the largest demands of 
our exacting age. ‘Thou hast given us Thy Son,” 
says some one, “and wilt Thou not give us bread ?” 
We have a generous Lord. His only complaint is that 


i. 3-5.] THE SALUTATION. 25 


we do not ask enough. “ Yeare My friends,” He says: 
“T have given My life for you. Ask what ye will, and 
it shall be done unto you.” Giving us Himself, He 
has given us all things. Abraham and Moses, David 
and Isaiah, “Paul and Apollos and Cephas—yea the 
world itself, life and death, things present and to come— 
all are ours; and we are Christ’s and Christ is God’s” 
(1 Cor. iii. 22, 23). Such is the chain of blessing that 
hangs on this single gift. 

Great as the gift is, it is not greater than our need. 
Wanting a Divine Son of man, human life remains a 
baffled aspiration, a pathway leading to no goal. Lack- 
ing Him, the race is incomplete, a body without its 
head, a flock that has no master. By the coming of 
Christ in the flesh human life finds its ideal realized ; 
its haunting dream of a Divine helper and leader in the 
midst of men, of a spiritual and. immortal perfection 
brought within its reach, has attained fulfilment. ‘God 
hath raised up a horn of salvation for us in the house 
of His servant David; as He spake by the mouth of 
His holy prophets, which have been since the world 
began.” Jacob’s vision has come true. There is the 
golden ladder, with its foot resting on the cold, stony 
earth, and its top on heaven’s starry platform, with its 
angels ascending and descending through the darkness ; 
and you may climb its steps, high as you will! So 
humanity receives its crown of life. Heaven and earth 
-are linked, God and man reunited in the person of 
Jesus Christ. 

But Paul will not suffer us to linger at Bethlehem. 
He hastens on to Calvary. The Atonement, not the 
Incarnation, is in his view the centre of Christianity. 
To the cross of Jesus, rather than to His cradle, he 
attaches our salvation. “ Jesus Christ gave Himself”’— 


26 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





what for, and in what way? What was the errand 
that brought Him here, in such a guise, and at such a 
time ? Was it to meet our need, to fulfil our human 
aspirations, to crown the moral edifice, to lead the race 
onward to the goal of its development? Yes—ultim- 
ately, and in the final issue, for ‘as many as receive 
Him”; it was to “ present every man perfect in Christ.” 
But that was not the primary object of His coming, of 
such acoming. Happy for us indeed, and for Him, if 
it could have been so. To come to a world waiting 
for Him, hearkening for the cry, “ Behold thy God, O 
Israel,” would have been a pleasant and a fitting thing. 
But to find Himself rejected by His own, to be spit 
upon, to hear the multitude shout, ‘‘ Away with Him!” 
was this the welcome that he looked for? Yea surely, 
nothing else but this. For He gave Himself for our 
sins. He came to a world steeped in wickedness, 
seething with rebellion against God, hating Him be- 
cause it hated the Father that sent Him, sure to say 
as soon as it saw Him, “ We will not have this man 
to reign over us.” Not therefore by way of incarna- 
tion and revelation alone, as it might have been for an 
innocent race; but by way of sacrifice, as a victim on 
the altar of expiation, ‘a lamb led to the slaughter,’ 
He gave Himself up for us all. “To deliver us from 
an evil world,” says the Apostle; to mend a faulty and 
imperfect world, something less and other would have 
sufficed. 

Extreme diseases call for extreme remedies, The 
case with which our gocd Physician had to deal was 
a desperate one. The world was sick at heart; its 
moral nature rotting to the core. Human life was 
shattered to its foundation, If it was to be saved, if 
the race was to escape perdition, the fabric must be 


i. 3-5-] THE SALUTATION. 27 





reconstructed upon another basis, on the ground of a 
new righteousness, outside ourselves and yet akin to 
us, near enough to take hold of us and grow into us, 
which should draw to itself the broken elements of 
human life, and as a vital organic force refashion them, 
“ creating ” men “ anew in Christ Jesus ”—a righteous- 
ness availing before God, and in its depth and width 
sufficient to bear a world’s weight. Such a new foun- 
dation Jesus Christ has laid in His death. “He laid 
down His life for us,” the Shepherd for the sheep, the 
Friend for His perishing friends, the Physician for 
sufferers who had no other remedy. It had come to 
this,—either He must die, or we must die for ever. 
Such was the sentence of the All-wise Judge; on that 
judgement the Redeemer acted. “ His judgements are 
a great deep”; and in this sentence there are depths 
of mystery into which we tremble to look, “secret 
things that belong unto the Lord our God.” But so it 
was. There was no way but this, no moral possibility 
of saving the world, and yet saving Him the accursed 
death. 

If there had been, would not the Almighty Father 
have found it out? would He not have “taken away 
the cup” from those white, quivering lips? No; He 
must die. He must consent to be “made sin, made 
a curse” for us. He must humble His stainless inno- 
cence, humble His glorious Godhead down to the dust 
- of death. He must die, at the hands of the men He 
created and loved, with the horror of the world’s sin 
fastened on Him; die under a blackened heaven, under 
the averting of the Father’s face. And He didit. He 
said, “Father, Thy will be done. Smite the Shepherd ; 
but let the sheep escape.” So He “gave Himself for 
our sins.” 


28 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


Ah, it was no easy march, no holiday pageant, the 
coming of the Son of God into this world of ours. He 
“came to save sinners.” Not to help good men—this 
were a grateful task; but to redeem bad men—the 
hardest work in God’s universe. It tasked the strength 
and the devotion of the Son of God. Witness Geth- 
semane. And it will cost His Church something, more 
haply than we dream of now, if the work of the 
Redeemer is to be made effectual, and “the travail of 
His soul satisfied.” 

In pity and in sorrow was that gift bestowed; in 
deep humility and sorrow must it be accepted. It is 
a very humbling thing to “receive the atonement,” to 
be made righteous on such terms as these. A man 
who has done well, can with satisfaction accept the 
help given him to do better. But to know that one has 
done very ill, to stand in the sight of God and truth 
condemned, marked with the disgrace that the cruci- 
fixion of the Son of God has branded on our human 
nature, with every stain of sin in ourselves revealed in 
the light of His sacrifice, is a sore abasement. When 
one has been compelled to cry out, “Lord, save; or 
I perish!” he has not much left to plume himself 
upon. There was Saul himself, a perfect moralist, 
‘blameless in the righteousness of the law.” Yet he 
must confess, ‘‘ How to perform that which is good I 
find not. In me, that is in my flesh, dwelleth no good 
thing. Wretch that I am, who shall deliver me?” 
Was not this mortifying to the proud young Pharisee, 
the man of strict conscience and high-souled moral 
endeavour? It was like death. And whoever has 
with sincerity made the same attempt to attain in the 
strength of his will to a true virtue, has tasted of this 
bitterness. 


1. 3-5.] THE SALUTATION. 29 


This however is what many cannot understand. 
The proud heart says, “No; I will not stoop to that. 
I have my faults, my defects and errors, not a few. 
But as for what you call sez, as for guilt and inborn 
depravity, I am not going to tax myself with anything 
of the kind. Leave mea little self-respect.” So with 
the whole herd of the self-complacent, half-religious 
Laodiceans. Once a week they confess themselves 
‘(miserable sinners,” but their sins against God never 
yet cost them one half hour of misery. And Paul’s 
“gospel is hid tothem.” If they read this Epistle, they 
cannot tell what it is all about; why Paul makes so 
much ado, why these thunderings of judgement, these 
cries of indignation, these beseechings and protestings 
and redoubled arguments,—all because a parcel of 
foolish Galatians wanted to play at being Jews! They 
are inclined to think with Festus, that this good Paul 
was a little beside himself. Alas! to such men, content 
with the world’s good opinion and their own, the death 
of Christ is made of none effect. Its moral grandeur, 
its infinite pathos, is lost upon them. They pay it a 
conventional respect, but as for deHeving in it, as for 
making it their own, and dying with Christ to live in 
Him—they have no idea what it means. That, they 
will tell you, is “mysticism,” and they are practical 
men of the world. They have never gone out of them- 
selves, never discovered their moral insufficiency. 
These are they of whom Jesus said, “The publicans 
and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before 
you.” It is our human independence, our moral self- 
conceit, that robs us of the Divine bounty. How 
should God give His righteousness to men so well 
furnished with their own? “Blessed” then “are the 
poor in spirit”; blessed are the broken in heart—poor 


30 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





enough, broken enough, bankrupt enough to stoop to 
a Saviour “ who gave Himself for our sins.” 

II. Sinful men have made an evil world. The world, 
as Paul knew it, was evil indeed. ‘“ The existing evil 
age,” he says, the world as it then was, in contrast with 
the glory of the perfected Messianic kingdom. 

This was a leading distinction of the rabbinical 
schools ; and the writers of the New Testament adopt it, 
with the necessary modification, that ‘the coming age,” 
in their view, commences with the Parousia, the full 
advent of the Messiah King.* The period that inter- 
venes since His first appearing is transitional, be- 
longing to both eras. It is the conclusion of “ this 
world,” {| to which it appertains in its outward and 
material relations; { but under the perishing form of 
the present there lies hidden for the Christian believer 
the seed of immortality, “the earnest” of his future 
and complete inheritance.§ Hence the different and 
seemingly contradictory ways in which Scripture speaks 
of the world that now is. 

To Paul at this time the world wore its darkest 
aspect. There is a touching emphasis in the order of 
this clause. ‘ The present world, evil as it is:” the 
words are a sigh for deliverance. The Epistles to 
Corinth show us how the world just now was using the 
Apostle. The wonder is that one man could bear so 
much. “ We are made as the filth of the world,” he 
says, “the offscouring of all things.” || So the world 
treated its greatest living benefactor. And as for his 





* 2 Thess. i. 5—7 ; 2 Tim. iv. 18; Heb. x. 12, 13; 1 Pet. v. Io. 
7k Gok. Xs WE) cLleb: 155, 26. 

¢ 1 Cor. vii. 31 ; 1 John ii. 17. 

§ Rom. viii. 18 ; Eph. i. 13, 14. 

) 1 Cor. iv. 9—13 ; xv. 30, 323 2 Cor. vi. 4, 10; xi. 16, 33. 


i. 3-5.) THE SALUTATION. 3r 
Master—“ the princes of this world crucified the Lord 
of glory.” Yes, it was a bad old world, that in which 
Paul and the Galatians lived—false, licentious, cruel. 
And that “evil world” still exists. 

True, the world, as we know it, is vastly better than 
that of Paul’s day. Not in vain have Apostles taught, 
and martyrs bled, and the Church of Christ witnessed 
and toiled through so many ages. ‘Other men have 
laboured; we enter into their labours.” An English 
home of to-day is the flower of the centuries. To 
those cradled in its pure affections, endowed with 
health and honourable work and refined tastes, the 
world must be, and was meant to be, in many aspects 
a bright and pleasant world. Surely the most sorrow- 
ful have known days in which the sky was all sunshine 
and the very air alive with joy, when the world looked 
as when it came forth fresh from its Creator’s hand, 
“and behold, it was very good.” There is nothing in 
the Bible, nothing in the spirit of true religion to damp 
the pure joy of such days as these. But there are 
“the days of darkness ;” and they are many. The 
Serpent has crept into our Paradise. Death breathes 
on it his fatal blast. 

And when we look outside the sheltered circles of 
home-life and Christian brotherhood, what a sea of 
misery spreads around us. How limited and partial 
is the influence of religion. What a mass of unbelief 
and godlessness surges up to the doors of our sanc- 
tuaries. What appalling depths of iniquity exist in 
modern society, under the brilliant surface of our 
material civilization. And however far the dominance 
of sin in human society may be broken—as, please God, 
it shall be broken, still evil is likely to remain in many 
tempting and perilous forms until the world is burnt to 


32 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





ashes in the fires of the Last Judgement. Is it not an 
evil world, where every morning newspaper serves up 
to us its miserable tale of disaster and of crime, where 
the Almighty’s name is “all the day blasphemed,” and 
every night drunkenness holds its horrid revels and 
the daughters of shame walk the city streets, where 
great Christian empires tax the pcor man’s bread and 
make his life bitter to maintain their huge standing 
armies and their cruel engines of war, and where, in 
this happy England and its cities teeming with wealth, 
there are thousands of patient, honest working women, 
whose life under ‘the fierce stress of competition is a 
veritable slavery, a squalid, dreary struggle just to keep 
hunger from the door? Ay, it is a world so evil that 
no good and right-thinking man who knows it, would 
care to live in it for a single day, but for the hope of 
helping to make it better. 

Now it was the purpose of Jesus Christ, that for 
those who believe in Him this world’s evil should be 
brought absolutely to an end. He promises a full 
deliverance from all that tempts and afflicts us here. 
With sin, the root of evil, removed, its bitter fruits at 
last will disappear. We shall rise to the life immortal. 
We shall attain our perfect consummation and bliss 
both in body and soul. Kept from the evil of the 
world while they remain in it, enabled by His grace to 
witness and contend against it, Christ’s servants shall 
then be lifted clean out for it of ever. “Father, I 
will,” prayed Jesus, “that they also whom Thou hast 
given Me, may be with Me where I am.” To that 
final salvation, accomplished in the redemption of our 
body and the setting up of Christ’s heavenly kingdom, 
the Apostle’s words look forward: ‘‘that He might 
deliver us owt of this present evil world.” This was 


i. 3-5.) THE SALUTATION. 33 


the splendid hope which Paul offered to the dying and 
despairing world of his day. The Galatians were 
persuaded of it and embraced it ; he entreats them not 
to let it go. 

The self-sacrifice of Christ, and the deliverance it 
brings, are both, the Apostle concludes, “ according to 
the will of God, even our Father.” The wisdom and 
might of the Eternal are pledged to the work of human 
redemption. The cross of Jesus Christ is the mani- 
festo of Infinite Love. Let him therefore who rejects 
it, know against Whom he is contending. Let him 
who perverts and falsifies it, know with what he is 
trifling. He who receives and obeys it, may rest 
assured that all things are working for his good. For 
all things are in the hands of our God and Father; 
“to Whom,” let us say with Paul, “be glory for ever. 
Amen.” 


CHAPTER IIL 


THE ANATHEMA. 


“T marvel that ye are so quickly removing from him that called you 
in the grace of Christ unto a different gospel; which is not another 
gospel: only there are some that trouble you, and would pervert the 
gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, should 
preach unto you any gospel other than that which we preached unto 
you, let him be anathema. As we have said before, so say I now again, 
If any man preacheth unto you any gospel other than that which ye 
received, let him be anathema. For am I now persuading men, or 
God? or am I seeking to please men? if I were still pleasing men, f 
should not be a servant of Christ.” —GAL, i. 6—10. 


FTER the Salutation in Paul’s Epistles comes the 

Thanksgiving. Evyapictaé or Evdoynrés—these 
are the words we expect first tomeet. Even in writing 
to Corinth, where there was so much to censure and 
deplore, he begins, “I give thanks to my God always 
for you.” This letter deviates from the Apostle’s 
devout and happy usage. Not “I give thanks,” but 
“T marvel;” not blessing, but avathema is coming 
from his lips: a surprise that jars all the more upon 
one’s ears, because it follows on the sublime doxology 
of the preceding verse. ‘‘I marvel to see you so 
quickly falling away to another gospel. . . . But if any 
one preach unto you any gospel other than that ye 
received—ay, though it were ourselves, or an angel 
from heaven—I have said once, and I say again, Let 
HIM BE ANATHEMA.” 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 35 


These words were well calculated to startle the 
Galatians out of their levity. They are like a lightning- 
flash which shows one to be standing on the edge of 
a precipice. We see at once the infinite seriousness 
of the Judaic controversy, the profound gulf that lies 
between Paul and his opposers. He is for open war. 
He is in haste to fling his gage of defiance against 
these enemies of the cross. With all his tact and 
management, his readiness to consult the susceptibilities 
and accommodate the scruples of sincere consciences, 
the Apostle can find no room for conciliation here. He 
knows the sort of men he has to deal with. He per- 
ceives that the whole truth of the Gospel is at stake. 
Not circumstantials, but essentials; not his personal 
authority, but the honour of Christ, the doctrine of the 
cross, is involved in this defection. He must speak 
- plainly; he must act strongly, and at once; or the 
cause of the Gospel is lost. .‘‘If I continued any longer 
to please men,” he says, “I should not be a servant 
of Christ.” To stand on terms with such opponents, 
to palter with this “other gospel,” would be treason 
against Him. There is but one tribunal at which this 
quarrel can be decided. To Him “ who had called” 
the Galatian believers “in Christ’s grace,” who by the 
same grace had called the Apostle to His service and 
given him the message he had preached to them—to 
God he appeals. In His name, and by the authority 
conferred upon him and for which he must give account, 
he pronounces these troublers “anathema.” They are 
enemies of Christ, by their treachery excluded from 
His kingdom. 

However unwelcome, however severe the course the 
Apostle takes, he has no alternative. “ For now,” he 
cries, “is it men that I persuade, or God?” He must 


36 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


do his duty, let who will condemn. Paul was ready 
to go all lengths in pleasing men in consistence with 
loyalty to Christ, where he could do it “ for their good, 
unto edification.” But if their approval clashed with 
God’s, then it became “a very small thing:”* he did 
not heed it one jot. Such is the temper of mind which 
the Epistles to Corinth disclose in Paul at this juncture. 
In the same spirit he indites these trenchant and dis- 
pleasing words. 

With a heavy heart Paul has taken up his pen. If 
we judge rightly of the date of this letter, he had just 
passed through the darkest hour of his experience, 
when not his life alone, but the fate of his Gentile 
mission hung in the balance. His expulsion from 
Ephesus, coming at the same time as the Corinthian 
revolt, and followed by a prostrating attack of sickness, 
had shaken his soul to its depths. Never had his 
heart been so torn with anxiety, never had he felt 
himself so beaten down and discomfited, as on that 
melancholy journey from Ephesus to Macedonia. ¢ 
“Out of anguish of heart and with many tears” and 
after-relentings (2 Cor. ii. 4; vii. 8) he wrote his First 
letter to Corinth. And this Epistle is even more severe. 
There runs through it a peculiar mental tension, an 
exaltation of feeling such as prolonged and deep suffer- 
ing leaves behind in a nature like Paul’s. “The marks 
of Jesus” (ch. vi. 17) are visible, impressed on his 
spirit no less than on his body. The Apostle’s heart 
is full to overflowing. Its warm glow is felt under the 
calmer course of narrative and argument: while at the 
beginning and end of the Epistle it breaks forth in 
language of burning indignation and melting pathos, 


* 1 Cor. iv. 3, 43 2 Cor. v. 9—I2; xii. 19. 
t 2 Cor. i. 8—10; ii. 12, 13 ; iv. 8—11; vii. 5—7. 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 37 





Before advancing a single step, before entering on any 
sort of explanation or discussion, his grief at the fickle- 
ness of his Galatian children and his anger against 
their seducers must find expression. 

These sentences demand, before we proceed further, 
a few words of exegetical definition. For the reference 
of “so quickly” it is needless to go beyond the verb 
it qualifies. The Apostle cannot surely mean, “so 
soon falling away (after your conversion).” For the 
Galatian Churches had been founded five, if not seven, 
years before this time; and the backsliding of recent 
converts is less, and not more, surprising than of 
established believers. What astonishes Paul is the 
suddenness of this movement, the facility with which 
the Galatians yielded to the Judaizing “ persuasion,” 
the rapid spread of this new leaven. As to the double 
“other” (€tepov, different, R.V.—aAno) of vv. 6 and 7, 
and the connection of the idiomatic “only” (e py, 
except),—we regard the second other as an abrupt cor- 
rection of the first; while the only clause, extending to 
the end of ver. 7, mediates between the two, qualifying 
the statement “ There is no other gospel,” by showing 
in what sense the writer at first had spoken of 
“another.” “Ye are falling away,” says he, “to 
another sort of gospel—which is not another, except 
that there are certain that trouble you and would fain 
pervert the gospel of Christ.” The word gospel is 
therefore in the first instance applied ironically. Paul 
yields the sacred title up to his opponents, only to 
snatch it out of their false hands. ‘“ Another gospel! 
there is only one; although there are men that falsify 
it, and seek to foist something else upon you in its 
name.” Seven times in this context (vv. 6—11) does 
the Apostle reiterate, in noun or verb, this precious 


38 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


word, as though he could not let it go. A strange sort 
of “good news” for the Galatians, that they must be 
circumcised forsooth, and observe the Jewish Kalendar! 
eh. -v.'2, 33 Wi. 12 5 deg, tO.) 

I. In Paul’s view, there is but one gospel for man- 
kind. The gospel of Jesus Christ bears a fixed, inviolable 
character. 

On this position the whole teaching of Paul rests,— 
and with it, may we not add, Christianity itself? 
However variously we may formulate the essentials of 
a Christian man’s faith, we are generally agreed that 
there are such essentials, and that they are found in 
Paul’s gospel to the Gentiles. With him the good tidings 
about Christ constituted a very definite and, as we 
should say, dogmatic body of truth. In whatever 
degree his gospel has been confused and overlaid by 
later teachings, to his own mind its terms were perfectly 
clear, and its authority incontestable. With all its 
breadth, there is nothing nebulous, nothing limp or 
hesitating about the theology of Paul. In its main 
doctrines it is fixed and hard as adamant; and at the 
challenge of this Judaistic perversion it rings out an 
instant and peremptory denial. It was the ark of God 
on which the Jewish troublers laid their unholy hands. 
“Christ’s grace” is lodged in it. God’s call to mankind 
was conveyed by these “ good tidings.” The Churches 
which the Apostle had planted were ‘“ God’s husbandry, 
God’s building ;” and woe to the man who tampered 
with the work, or sought to lay another foundation 
than that which had been laid (1 Cor. iii. 5—11). To 
distort or mutilate “the word of the truth of the 
gospel,” to make it mean now one thing and now 
another, to disturb the faith of half-instructed Chris- 
tians by captious reasonings and self-interested per- 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 39 
versions, was a capital offence, a sin against God and 
a crime against humanity. Paul possesses in his 
gospel truth of unspeakable value to mankind, the 
supreme revelation of God’s mercy to the world. And 
he is prepared to launch his anathema against every 
wilful impugner, no matter what his pretensions, or 
the quarter from which he comes. 

“Well,” it may be said, “this is sheer religious 
intolerance. Paul is doing what every dogmatist, every 
ecclesiastical bigot has done in his turn. His beliefs 
are, to be sure, ¢e truth; and accordingly he unchurches 
and anathematizes those who cannot agree with him. 
With all his nobility of mind, there is in Paul a leaven 
of Jewish rancour. He falls short of the sweet reason- 
ableness of Jesus.” So some will say, and in saying 
claim to represent the mild and tolerant spirit of our 
age. But is there not in every age an intolerance that 
is just and necessary? ‘There is a logical intolerance 
of sophistry and trifling. There is a moral intolerance 
of impurity and deceit. And there is a religious in- 
tolerance, which includes both these and adds to them 
a holy jealousy for the honour of God and the spiritual 
welfare of mankind. It is mournful indeed to think 
how many crimes have been perpetrated under the 
cloak of pious zeal. TZanitum Religio potuit suadere 
malorum. The corruption of Christianity by human 
pride and cruelty has furnished copious illustrations of 
the terrible line of Lucretius. But the perversion of 
this noblest instinct of the soul does not take away 
either its reasonableness or its use. The quality of 
a passion is one thing; the mode of its expression 
is another. The hottest fires of bigotry are cold when 
compared with the scorching intolerance of Christ's 
denunciations of the Pharisees, The anathemas of 


40 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


Jesus and of Paul are very different from those of 
arrogant pontiffs, or of narrow sectaries, inflamed with 
the idolatry of their own opinions. After all, the zeal 
of the rudest fanatic in religion has more in it of manly 
worth and moral capability than the languors of a 
blasé scepticism, that sits watching with amused con- 
tempt the strife of creeds and the search of human 
hearts after the Living God. There is an idle, listless, 
cowardly tolerance, as there is an intolerance that is 
noble and just. 

The one gospel has had many interpreters. Their 
voices, it must be confessed, sound strangely dis- 
cordant. While the teachings of Christianity excite 
so intensely a multitude of different minds, of every 
variety of temper and capacity, contradiction will 
inevitably arise. Nothing is easier than to scoff at 
“the Babel of religious opinions.” Christian truth is 
necessarily refracted and discoloured in passing through 
disordered natures and defective minds. And, alas, 
that Church which claims to hold the truth without 
possibility of error or variation, has perverted Christ’s 
gospel most of all. 

But notwithstanding all differences, there exists 
a large and an increasing measure of agreement 
amongst the great body of earnest Christians. Slowly, 
yet surely, one debate after another comes to its settle- 
ment. The noise and publicity with which discussion 
on matters of faith is carried on in an age of religious 
freedom, and when liberty of thought has outrun 
mental discipline, should not lead us to exaggerate the 
extent of our disagreements. In the midst of human 
controversy and error, the Spirit of truth is carrying on 
His work. He is the supreme witness of Jesus Christ. 
And He abides with us for ever, The newly awakened 


i. 6-10. THE ANATHEMA. 4! 
historical conscience of our times is visibly making for 
unity. The Church is going back to the New Testament. 
And the more thoroughly she does this, the more 
directly and truthfully she addresses herself to the 
original record and comes face to face with Christ and His 
Apostles there, so much the more shall we realize the 
oneness and certainty of ‘‘the faith once delivered to 
the saints.” Beneath the many superstructures, faulty 
and changing in their form, we reach the one “ founda- 
tion of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself 
being the chief corner-stone.” There we touch solid 
rock. “ The unity of the faith” lies in ‘‘ the knowledge 
of the Son of God.” Of Him we shall learn most from 
those who knew Him Lest. Let us transport ourselves 
into the fellowship of His first disciples; and listen to 
His gospel as it came fresh from the lips of Peter and 
John and Paul, and the Divine Master Himself. Let 
us bid the voices of the centuries be silent, that we 
may hear Him. 

For the Galatian readers, as for Paul, there could 
be but one gospel. By his voice the call of God had 
reached their hearts, (ver. 6; ch. v. 8). The witness of 
the Spirit of God and of Christ in the supernatural 
gifts they had received, and in the manifold fruit of a 
regenerate life (ch. ili. 2—5 ; v. 22, 23), was evidence to 
them that the Apostle’s message was “the true gospel 
of the grace of God.” This they had gratefully 
acknowledged at the time of his first visit (ch. iv. 15). 
The proclamation of the crucified and risen Christ had 
brought to them unspeakable blessing. Through it 
they received the knowledge of God; they were made 
consciously sons of God, heirs of life eternal (ch. ili. 26 ; 
iv. 6—9Q; vi. 8). To entertain any other gospel, after 
this experience and all these professions, was an act of 


42 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


apostasy. “Ye are deserting (like runaway soldiers), 
turning renegades from God:” such is the language in 
which Paul taxes his readers. In listening to the 
persuasion of the Judaists, they were “ disobeying the 
truth ” (ch. v. 7, 8). They were disloyal to conscience ; 
they were trifling with the most sacred convictions of 
their lives, and with the testimony of the Spirit of God. 
They were forgetting the cross of Christ, and making 
His death of none effect. Surely they must have been 
“ bewitched” to act thus ; some deadly spell was upon 
them, which had laid memory and conscience both to 
sleep (ch. ii. 21—iii. 3). 

The nature and the contents of the two “ gospels” 
current in Galatia will be made clear in the further 
course of the Epistle. They were the gospels of 
Grace and of Law respectively; of Salvation by Faith, 
and by Works ; of life in the Spirit, and in the Flesh ; 
of the Cross and the Resurrection on the one hand, 
and of Circumcision and the Kalendar and “ Clean 
meats” on the other; the gospels of inwardness, and 
of externalism—of Christ, and of self. The conflict 
between these two was the great struggle of Paul's life. 
His success was, historically speaking, the salvation of 
Christianity. 

But this contention did not end with his victory. 
The Judaistic perversion appealed to tendencies too 
persistent in our nature to be crushed at one blow. 
The gospel of externalism is dear to the human heart. 
It may take the form of culture and moralities; or of 
“services” and sacraments and churchly order; or of 
orthcedoxy and philanthropy. These and such things 
make themselves our idols; and trust in them takes 
the place of faith in the living Christ. It is not enough 
that the eyes of our heart should once have seen the 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 43 


Lord, that we should in other days have experienced 
“the renewing of the Holy Ghost.” It is possible to 
forget, possible to ‘(remove from Him that called us 
in the grace of Christ.” With little change in the form 
of our religious life, its inward reality of joy in God, 
of conscious sonship, of fellowship in the Spirit, may 
be utterly departed. The gospel of formalism will 
spring up and flourish on the most evangelical soil, 
and in the most strictly Pauline Churches. Let it be 
banned and barred out never so completely, it knows 
how to find entrance, under the simplest modes of 
worship and the soundest doctrine. The serried 
defence of Articles and Confessions constructed against 
it will not prevent its entrance, and may even prove 
its cover and intrenchment. Nothing avails, as the 
‘Apostle says, but a constant ‘new creation.” The 
life of God in human souls is sustained by the energy 
of His Spirit, perpetually renewed, ever proceeding from 
the Father and the Son. “The life that I live in the 
flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved 
me and gave Himself for me.” This is the true 
orthodoxy. The vitality of his personal faith in Christ 
kept Paul safe from error, faithful in will and intellect 
to the one gospel. 

II. We have still to consider the import of the 
judgement pronounced by Paul upon those who perveri 
the gospel of Christ. ‘Let him be anathema. Even 
should it be ourselves, or an angel from heaven, /et him 
be anathema.” 

These are tremendous words. Commentators have 
been shocked at the Apostle’s damning his opponents 
after this fashion, and have sought to lighten the weight 
of this awful sentence. It has been sometimes toned 
down into an act of excommunication or ecclesiastical 


44 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





censure. But this explanation will not hold. Paul 
could not think of subjecting ‘‘an angel” toa penalty 
like that. He pronounced excommunication against 
disorderly members of the Thessalonian Church; and 
in 1 Cor. v. 1—8 he gives directions for the carrying 
out of a similar decree, attended with severe bodily 
affliction supernaturally adjudged, against a sinner 
whose presence grossly stained the purity of the Church. 
But this sentence goes beyond either of those. It 
contemplates the exclusion of the offenders from the 
Covenant of grace, their loss of final salvation. 

Thrice besides has Paul used this ominous word. 
The cry ‘‘ Jesus is anathema,” in I Cor. xii. 3, reveals 
with a lurid effect the frenzied malignity towards Christ 
of which the spirit of evil is sometimes capable. In 
a very different connection the word appears in Rom. 
ix. 3; where Paul “could wish himself anathema from 
Christ,” if that were possible, for his brethren’s sake ; 
he could find it in his heart to be cut off for ever from 
that love of God in Christ of which he has just spoken 
in terms of unbounded joy and confidence (Rom. viii. 
31—39), and banished from the heavenly kingdom, if 
through his exclusion his Jewish kindred might be 
saved. Self-sacrifice can go no further. No heavier 
loss than this could be conceived for any human being. 
Nearest to our passage is the imprecation at the end of 
1 Corinthians: “If any man love not the Lord, let him 
be anathema,”—a judgement proclaimed against cold 
and false hearts, knowing His love, bearing His name, 
but with no true love to Him. 

This Greek word in its Biblical use has grown out of 
the chérem of the Old Testament, the ban declared 
against that which was cut off from the Divine mercies 
and exposed to the full sweep of judgement. Thus in 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 45 


Deut. xiii. 12—18, the city whose people should “go 
and serve other gods,” is declared chérem (anathema), 
an “accursed,” or “devoted thing” (R.V.), on which 
ensues its destruction by sword and fire, leaving it to 
remain “a ruin-heap for ever.” Similarly in Joshua 
vi., vii., the spoil of Jericho is anathema, Achan’s theft is 
therefore anathema, and Israel is made by it anathema 
until “the accursed thing is destroyed” from among 
the people. Such were the recollections *ssociated 
with this word in the Mosaic law, which it would in- 
evitably carry with it to the minds of those against 
whom it was now directed. And there is nothing in 
later Jewish usage to mitigate its force. 

Now the Apostle is not writing like a man in a 
passion, who flings out his words as missiles, eager 
only to wound and confound his opponents. He 
repeats the sentence. He quotes it as one that he 
had already affirmed in the hearing of his readers. 
The passage bears the marks of well-weighed thought 
and judicial solemnity. In pronouncing this judge- 
ment on “the troublers,” Paul acts under the sense 
of Apostolic responsibility. We must. place the 
sentence in the same line as that of Peter against 
Ananias and Sapphira, and of Paul himself against 
Elymas the Cypriot sorcerer, and against the incestuous 
Corinthian. In each case there is a supernatural 
insight and authorization, “the authority which the 
Lord gave” and which is wielded by His inspired 
Apostle. The exercise of this judicial function was one 
of “the signs of the Apostle.” This was the proof of 
“Christ speaking in him” which Paul was so loth to 
give at Corinth,* but which at this crisis of his ministry 


# 2 Cor. x. I-11; xiii. I—10; 1 Cor. iv 18—21, 


46 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


he was compelled to display. And if he “reckons to 
be bold against” his adversaries in Galatia, he knows 
well the ground on which he stands. 

His anathema struck at men who were the worst 
enemies of Christ. ‘We can do nothing against the 
truth,” he says; “ but for the truth” he was ready to 
do and dare everything,—to “come with a rod,” as he 
tells the proud Corinthians. There was no authority, 
however lofty, that he was not warranted to use on 
Christ’s behalf, no measure, however severe, from which 
he would shrink, if it were required in defence of the 
truth of the Gospel. “He possesses weapons, not 
fleshly, but mighty through God”; and he is prepared 
to bring them all into play rather than see the gospel 
perverted or overthrown. Paul will hurl his anathema 
at the prince of the archangels, should He come 
“ preaching another gospel,” tempting his children from 
their allegiance to Christ. This bolt was not shot a 
moment too soon. Launched against the legalist 
conspiracy, and followed up by the arguments of 
this and the Roman Epistle, it saved the Church 
from being overpowered by reactionary Judaism. The 
Apostle’s judgement has marked the gospel of the 
cross for all time as God’s inviolable truth, guarded by 
lightnings. 

The sentences of judgement pronounced by the 
Apostles present a striking contrast to those that have 
fulminated from the Chair of their self-styled successors. 
In the Canons of the Council of Trent, for example, we 
have counted one hundred and thirty-five anathemas. 
A large proportion of these are concerned with the 
rights of the priesthood ; others with complicated and 
secondary points of doctrine ; some are directed virtually 
against the teaching of Paul himself. Here is one 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 47 


specimen : “If any one shall say that justifying faith is 
nothing else but a trust in the Divine mercy, remitting 
sins for Christ’s sake, or that it is this trust alone by 
which we are justified: let him be anathema” * Again, 
“If any one shall say that the Canon of the Mass 
contains errors, and therefore should be abrogated: let 
him be anathema.” f In the closing session, the final 
act of the presiding Cardinal was to pronounce, 
“ Anathema to all heretics;” to which the assembled 
prelates shouted in response, “ Anathema, anathema.” 
With this imprecation on their lips the Fathers of the 
Church concluded their pious labours. It was the Re- 
formation, it was “ the liberty of the sons of God” that 
Rome anathematized. Paul’s censure holds good against 
all the Conciliar Canons and Papal Bulls that con- 
travene it. But twice has he pronounced this awful 
word ; once against any that “love not the Lord,” a 
second time upon those who wilfully pervert His 
gospel. The Papal anathemas sound like the maledic- 
tions of an angry priesthood, jealous for its prerogatives; 
here we have the holy severity of an inspired Apostle, 
concerned only for the truth, and for his Master's 
honour. There speaks the conscious “lord over God's 
heritage,” wearing the triple crown, wielding the powers 
of Interdict and Inquisition, whose word sets armies in 
motion and makes kings tremble on their seats. Here 
a feeble, solitary man, “his bodily presence weak, his 
speech contemptible,’ hunted from place to place, 
scourged and stoned, shut up for years in prison, who 
could not, except for love’s sake, command the meanest 
service. How conspicuous in the one case, how want- 
ing in the other, is the might of the Spirit and the 


* Session vi, Can. xii, t Session xxii., Can. vi, 


48 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


dignity of the inspired word, the transcendence of 
moral authority. 

It is the moral conduct of those he judges that 
determines in each case the sentence passed by the 
Apostle. For a man knowing Jesus Christ, as we 
presume the members of the Corinthian Church did 
know Him, not to love Him, argues a bad heart. Must 
not we count ourselves accursed, if with our knowledge 
of Christ we had no love for Him? Such a man is 
already virtually anathema. He is severed as a branch 
from its vine, ready to. be gathered for the burning 
(John xv. 6). And these Galatian disturbers were 
something worse than mere mistaken enthusiasts for 
their native Jewish rites. Their policy was dishonour- 
able (ch. iv. 17). They made the gospel of Christ sub- 
servient to factious designs. They sought to win 
credit with their fellow-countrymen and to escape the 
reproach of the cross by imposing circumcision on the 
Gentiles (ch. ii. 4; vi. 12, 13). They prostituted religion 
to selfish and party purposes. They sacrificed truth to 
popularity, the glory of Christ and the cross to their 
own. They were of those whom the Apostle describes 
as “walking in craftiness and handling the word of 
God deceitfully,” ‘who “traffic” in the gospel, peddling 
with it as with petty wares, cheapening and adultera- 
ting it like dishonest biictestee to make their own 
market by it (2 Cor. ii. 17; iv. 2). Did not Paul do 
well to smite them with the rod of his mouth? Justly 
has he marked with the brand of this fiery anathema 
the false minister, “who serves not the Lord Christ, 
but his own belly.” 

But does this declaration preclude in such a case the 
possibility of repentance? We trow not. It declares 
the doom which is due to any, be he man or angel, who 


i. 6-10.] THE ANATHEMA. 49 


should do what these ‘‘troublers” are doing. It isa 
general sentence, and has for the individuals concerned 
the effect of a warning, like the announcement made 
concerning the Traitor at the Last Supper. However 
unlikely repentance might be in either instance, there 
is nothing to forbid it. So when Peter said to Simon 
Magus, “Thy money perish with thee!” he neverthe- 
less continued, ‘‘ Repent, therefore, of this thy wicked- 
ness, and pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy 
heart shall be forgiven thee” (Acts viii. 20—22). To 
his worst opponents, on any sign of contrition, Paul, 
we may be sure, would have gladly said the same. 





THE PERSONAL HISTORY. 


CHAPTER i, II—ii. 21. 


wee 


ee 





CHAPTER IV. 
PAUL’S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 


**For I make known to you, brethren, as touching the gospel 
which was preached by me, that it is not after man. For neither did I 
receive it from man, nor wasI taught it, but zt came to me through 
revelation of Jesus Christ. For ye have heard of my manner of life in 
time past in the Jews’ religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted 
the church of God, and made havock of it: and I advanced in the 
Jews’ religion beyond many of mine own age among my countrymen, 
being more exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers.” 
—GAL. i. 1I—14. 


ERE the Epistle begins in its main purport. 

What has gone before is somuchexordium. The 
sharp, stern sentences of vv. 6—1I0 are like the roll of 
artillery that ushers in the battle. The mists rise 
from the field. We see the combatants arrayed on 
either side. In due order and with cool self-command 
the Apostle proceeds to marshal and deploy his 
forces. His truthful narrative corrects the misrepre- 
sentations of his opponents, and repels their attack 
upon himself. His powerful dialectic wrests from 
their hands and turns against them their weapons of 
Scriptural proof. He wins the citadel of their position, 
by establishing the claim of the men of faith to be the 
sons of Abraham. On the ruins of confuted legalism 
he builds up an impregnable fortress for Christian 
liberty, an immortal vindication of the gospel of the 
grace of God. 


54 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


The cause of Gentile freedom at this crisis was 
bound up with the person of the Apostle Paul. His 
Gospel and his Apostleship must stand or fall together. 
The former was assailed through the latter. He was 
himself just now “the pillar and stay of the truth.” 
If his character had been successfully attacked and his 
influence destroyed, nothing, humanly speaking, could 
have saved Gentile Christendom at this decisive 
moment from falling under the assaults of Judaism. 
When he begins his crucial appeal with the words, 
“ Behold, J Paul say unto you” (ch. v. 2), we feel that 
the issue depends upon the weight which his readers 
may attach to his personal affirmation. He pits his 
own truthfulness, his knowledge of Christ, his spiritual 
discernment and authority, and the respect due to 
himself from the Galatians, against the pretensions of 
the new teachers. The comparison is not indeed so 
open and express as that made in 2 Corinthians ; none 
the less it tacitly runs through this Epistle. Paul is 
compelled to put himself in the forefront of his argu- 
ment. In the eyes of his children in the faith, he is 
bound to vindicate his Apostolic character, defamed by 
Jewish malice and untruth. 

The first two chapters of this Epistle are therefore 
Paul’s Apologia pro vita sua. With certain chapters in 
2 Corinthians, and scattered passages in other letters, 
they form the Apostle’s autobiography, one of the 
most perfect self-portraitures that literature contains. 
They reveal to us the man more effectively than 
any ostensible description could have done. They 
furnish an indispensable supplement to the external 
and cursory delineations given in the Acts of the 
Apostles. While Luke skilfully presents the outward 
framework of Paul's life and the events of his public 


i11-14.] PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 55 





career, it is to the Epistles that we turn—to none 
more frequently than this—for the necessary subjective 
data, for all that belongs to his inner character, his 
motives and principles. This Epistle brings into bold 
relief the Apostle’s moral physiognomy. Above all, it 
throws a clear and penetrating light on the event 
which determined his career—the greatest event in the 
history of Christianity after the Day of Pentecost— 
Paul’s conversion to faith in the Lord Jesus. 

This was at once the turning-point in the Apostle’s 
life, and the birth-hour of his gospel. If the Galatians 
were to understand his teaching, they must understand 
this occurrence ; they must know why he became a 
Christian, how he had received. the message which 
he brought to them. They would, he felt sure, enter 
more sympathetically into his doctrine, if they were 
better acquainted with the way in which he had 
arrived at it. They would see how well-justified was 
the authority, how needful the severity with which he 
writes. Accordingly he begins with a brief relation of 
the circumstances of his call to the service of Christ, 
and his career from the days of his Judaistic zeal, when 
he made havoc of the faith, till the well-known occa- 
sion on which he became its champion against Peter 
himself, the chief of the Twelve (ch. i. 11—ii. 21.) His 
object in this recital appears to be threefold: to refute 
the misrepresentations of the Circumcisionists; to 
vindicate his independent authority as an Apostle of 
Christ ; and further, to unfold the nature and terms of 
his gospel, so as to pave the way for the theological 
argument which is to follow, and which forms the body 
of the Epistle. 

I. Pauls gospel was supernaturally conveyed to him, 
by a personal intervention of Jesus Christ. This 


56 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


assertion is the Apostle’s starting-point. “ My gospel 
is not after man. I received it as Jesus Christ revealed 
it to me.” 

That the initial revelation was made to him by 
Christ in person, was a fact of incalculable importance 
for Paul. This had made him an Apostle, in the 
august sense in which he claims the title (ver. 1). 
This accounts for the vehemence with which he defends 
his doctrine, and for the awful sentence which he has 
passed upon its impugners. The Divine authorship of 
the gospel he preached made it impossible for him 
to temporize with its perverters, or to be influenced 
by human favour or disfavour in its administration. 
Had his teaching been “according to man,” he might 
have consented to a compromise ; he might reasonably 
have tried to humour and accommodate Jewish pre- 
judices. But the case is far otherwise. “I am not at 
liberty to please men,” he says, ‘‘for my gospel comes 
directly from Jesus Christ” (vv. 10, 11). So he 
“gives” his readers “ to know,” as if by way of formal 
notification.* 

The gospel of Paul was inviolable, then, because 
of its superhuman character. And this character was 
impressed upon it by its superhuman origin: “not 
according to man, for neither from man did I receive 
it, nor was I taught it, but by a revelation of Jesus 
Christ.” The Apostle’s knowledge of Christianity did 
not come through the ordinary channel of tradition 
and indoctrination; Jesus Christ had, by a miraculous 
interposition, taught him the truth about Himself. He 
says, “ Neither did /,” with an emphasis that points 
tacitly to the elder Apostles, whom he mentions a few 





* Comp. Rom. ix. 22; 1 Cor. xii. 3; xv. 13 2 Cor, viii. I, 


iar-14.]) PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 37 


sentences later (ver. 17). To this comparison his adver- 
saries forced him, making use of it as they freely did to 
his disparagement.* But it comes in by implication 
rather than direct assertion. Only by putting violence 
upon himself, and with strong expressions of his 
unworthiness, can Paul be brought to set his official 
claims in competition with those of the Twelve. Not- 
withstanding, it is perfectly clear that he puts his 
ministry on a level with theirs. He is no Apostle 
at second-hand, no disciple of Peter’s or dependant 
of the “pillar.” at Jerusalem. “Neither did I,” he 
declares, ‘any more than they, take my instructions 
from other lips than those of Jesus our Lord.” 

But what of this “revelation of Jesus Christ,” on 
which Paul lays so much stress? Does he mean a 
revelation made dy Christ, or about Christ? Taken 
by itself, the expression, in Greek as in English, bears 
either interpretation. In favour of the second con- 
struction—viz. that Paul speaks of a revelation by 
which Christ was made known to him—the language 
of ver. 16 is adduced: “It pleased God to reveal His 
Son in me.” Paul’s general usage points in the same 
direction. With him Christ is the odject of manifesta- 
tion, preaching, and the like. 2 Cor. xii. I is probably 
an instance to the contrary: “I will come to visions 
and revelations of the Lord.” f But it should be 
observed that wherever this genitive is objective (a 
revelation revealing Christ), God appears in the con- 
text, just as in ver. 16 below, to Whom the authorship 
of the revelation is ascribed. In this instance, the 


* Seech. ii. 6—14; 1 Cor.i. 12; iii. 223 iv. 93 ix. I—5; xv.8—to. 

} This genitive is, however, open to the other construction, which 
is unquestionable in 1 Cor. i. 7; 2 Thess. i. 7; also 1 Pet.i. 7, 13. 
Rey. i. 1 furnishes a prominent example of the szdzective genitive. 


58 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


gospel is the object revealed; and Jesus Christ, in 
contrast with man, is claimed for its Author. So at 
the outset (ver. 1) Christ, in His Divine character, was 
the Agent by whom Paul, as veritably as the Twelve, 
had received his Apostleship. We therefore assent to 
the ordinary view, reading this passage in the light of 
the vision of Jesus thrice related in the Acts.* We 
understand Paul to say that no mere man imparted to 
him the gospel he preached, but Jesus Christ revealed it. 

On the Damascus road the Apostle Paul found his 
mission. The vision of the glorified Jesus made him a 
Christian, and an Apostle. The act was a revelation—that 
is, in New Testament phrase, a supernatural, an imme- 
diately Divine communication of truth. And it was a 
revelation not conveyed in the first instance, as were 
the ordinary prophetic inspirations, through the Spirit ; 
“Jesus Christ,” in His Divine-human person, made 
Himself known to His persecutor. Paul had “seen 
that Just One and heard a voice from His mouth.” 

The appearance of Jesus to Saul of Tarsus was in 
itself a gospel, an earnest of the good tidings he was to 
convey to the world. ‘‘ Why persecutest thou Me?” 
that Divine voice said, in tones of reproach, yet of 
infinite pity. The sight of Jesus the Lord, meeting 
Saul’s eyes, revealed His grace and truth to the perse- 
cutor’s heart. He was brought in a moment to the 
obedience of faith; he said, “ Lord, what wilt Thou 
have me to do?” He “confessed with his mouth the 
Lord Jesus”; he ‘‘believed in his heart that God had 
raised Him from the dead.” It was true, after all, that 
‘God had made” the crucified Nazarene “‘ both Lord 
and Christ ;” for this was He! 


* Acts ix. I—I19 ; xxii. 5—16 ; xxvi. 12—18. 


111-14.) PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 59 





The cross, which had been Saul’s stumbling-block, 
deeply affronting his Jewish pride, from this moment 
was transformed. The glory of the exalted Redeemer 
cast back its light upon the tree of shame. The curse 
of the Law visibly resting upon Him, the rejection of 
men, marked Him out as God’s chosen sacrifice for sin. 
This explanation at once presented itself to an instructed 
and keenly theological mind like Saul’s, so soon as it 
was evident that Jesus was not accursed, as he had 
supposed, but approved by God. So Paul’s gospel 
was given him at a stroke. Jesus Christ dying for our 
sins, Jesus Christ living to save and to rule—behold 
“the good news”! The Apostle had it on no less 
authority than that of the risen Saviour. From Him 
he received it to publish wide as the world. 

Thus Saul of Tarsus was born again. And with 
the Christian man, the Christian thinker, the theologian, 
was born in him. The Pauline doctrine has its root in 
Paul’s conversion. It was a single, organic growth, the 
seed of which was this “revelation of Jesus Christ.” 
Its creative impulse was given in the experience of the 
memorable hour, when “God who said, Light shall 
shine out of darkness, in the face of Jesus Christ 
shined” into Saul’s heart. As the light of this reve- 
lation penetrated his spirit, he recognised, step by step, 
the fact of the resurrection, the import of the crucifixion, 
the Divinity of Jesus, His human mediatorship, the 
virtue of faith, the office of the Holy Spirit, the futility 
of Jewish ritual and works of law, and all the essential 
principles of his theology. Given the genius of Saul 
and his religious training, and the Pauline system of 
doctrine was, one might almost say, a necessary deduction 
from the fact of the appearance to him of the glorified 
Jesus. If that form of celestial splendour was Jesus, 


60 - THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





then He was risen indeed; then He was the Christ; 
He was, as He affirmed, the Son of God. If He was 
Lord and Christ, and yet died by the Father's will on 
the cross of shame, then His death could only be a 
propitiation, accepted by God, for the sins of men, 
whose efficacy had no limit, and whose merit left no 
room for legal works of righteousness. If this Jesus 
was the Christ, then the assumptions of Saul’s Judaism, 
which had led him into blasphemous hatred and outrage 
towards Him, were radically false; he will purge him- 
self from the ‘old leaven,” that his life may become 
“a new lump.” From that moment a world of life and 
thought began for the future Apostle, the opposite in 
all respects of that in which hitherto he had moved. 
“The old things,” he cries, ‘ passed away; lo, they 
have become new” (2 Cor. v. 17). Paul’s conversion 
was as complete as it was sudden. 

This intimate relation of doctrine and experience 
gives to Paul’s teaching a peculiar warmth and fresh- 
ness, a vividness of human reality which it everywhere 
retains, despite its lofty intellectualism and the scholastic 
form in which it is largely cast. It is theology alive, 
trembling with emotion, speaking words like flames, 
forming dogmas hard as rock, that when you touch 
them are yet glowing with the heat of those central 
depths of the human spirit from which they were cast 
up. The collision of the two great Apostles at Antioch 
shows how the strength of Paul’s teaching lay in his 
inward realization of the truth. There was /ife behind 
his doctrine. He was, and for the time the Jewish 
Apostle was not, acting and speaking out of the reality 
of spiritual conviction, of truth personally verified. Of 
the Apostle Paul above all divines the saying is true, 
Pectus facit theologum. And this personal knowledge 


Lau1-14.) PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 61 





of Christ, ‘the master light of all his seeing,” began 
when on the way to Damascus his eyes beheld Jesus 
our Lord. His farewell charge to the Church through 
Timothy (2 Tim. i. g9—12), while referring to the general 
manifestation of Christ to the world, does so in language 
coloured by the recollection of the peculiar revelation 
made at the beginning to himself: ‘‘God,” he says, 
“called us with a holy calling, according to His purpose 
and grace, which hath now been manifested by the 
appearing * of our Saviour Christ Jesus, who abolished 
death and brought life and immortality to light Tf 
through the gospel, whereunto J was appointed a 
preacher and apostle. For which cause I also suffer 
these things. But I am not ashamed: for I know Him 
in whom I have believed.” This manifestation of the 
celestial Christ shed its brightness along all his path. 

II. His assertion of the Divine origin of his doctrine 
Paul sustains by referring to the previous course of his 
life. There was certainly nothing in that to account 
for his preaching Christ crucified. “For you have 
heard,” he continues, “of my manner of life aforetime, 
when I followed Judaism.” 

Here ends the chain of fors reaching from ver. 10 to 13 
—a succession of explanations linking Paul’s denuncia- 
tion of the Christian Judaizers to the fact that he had 
himself been a violent anti-Christian Judaist. The seem- 
ing contradiction is in reality a consistent sequence. 
Only one who had imbibed the spirit of legalism as 
Saul of Tarsus had done, could justly appreciate the 
hostility of its principles to the new faith, and the 
sinister motives actuating the men who pretended to 





* "Empaveta, a supernatural appearance, such as that of the Second 
Advent. 
} Pwrifw, comp. 2 Cor. iv. 6. 


62 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





reconcile them. Paul knew Judaism by heart. He 
understood the sort of men who opposed him in the 
Gentile Churches. And if his anathema appear need- 
lessly severe, we must remember that no one was so 
well able to judge of the necessities of the case as the 
man who pronounced it. 

“You have heard”—from whom? In the first 
instance, probably, from Paul himself. But on this 
matter, we may be pretty sure, his opponents would 
have something to say. They did not scruple to assert 
that he ‘‘still preached circumcision” * and played 
the Jew even now when it suited him, charging him 
with insincerity. Or they might say, “ Paul is a 
renegade. Once the most ardent of zealots for Judaism, 
he has passed to the opposite extreme. He is a man 
you cannot trust. Apostates are proverbially bitter 
against their old faith.” In these and in other ways 
Paul’s Pharisaic career was doubtless thrown in his 
teeth. 

The Apostie sorrowfully confesses “that above 
measure he persecuted the Church of God and laid 
it waste.” His friend Luke makes the same admission 
in similar language.f There is no attempt to conceal 
or palliate this painful fact, that the famous Apostle of 
the Gentiles had been a persecutor, the deadliest enemy 
of the Church in its infant days. He was the very 
type of a determined, pitiless oppressor, the forerunner 
of the Jewish fanatics who afterwards sought his life, 
and of the cruel bigots of the Inquisition and the Star- 
chamber in later times. His restless energy, his 
indifference to the feelings of humanity in this work 
of destruction, were due to religious zeal. “I thought,” 





* Ch. v. 11; comp. 1 Cor. ix. 20; Acts xvi. 3 3 xxi. 20—26 ; xxiii. 6, 
t Acts vii. 58; vili. 1—3; ix. I. 








111-14.) PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 63 


he says, “I ought to do many things contrary to the 
name of Jesus of Nazareth.” In him, as in so many 
others, the saying of Christ was fulfilled: ‘The time 
cometh, when whoso killeth you will think that he is 
offering a sacrifice to God.” These Nazarenes were 
heretics, traitors to Israel, enemies of God. , Their 
leader had been crucified, branded with the extremest 
mark of Divine displeasure. His followers must perish. 
Their success meant the ruin of Mosaism. God willed 
their destruction. Such were Saul’s thoughts, until he 
heard the protesting voice of Jesus as he approached 
Damascus to ravage His little flock. No wonder that 
he suffered remorse to the end of his days. 

Saul’s persecution of the Church was the natural 
result of his earlier training, of the course to which in 
his youth he committed himself. The Galatians had 
heard also ‘‘ how proficient he was in Judaism, beyond 
many of his kindred and age; that he was surpassed 
by none in zeal for their ancestral traditions.” His 
birth (Phil. iii. 4, 5), education (Acts xxii. 3), tempera- 
ment, circumstances, all combined to make him a zealot 
of the first water, the pink and pattern of Jewish 
orthodoxy, the rising hope of the Pharisaic party, and 
an instrument admirably fitted to crush the hated and 
dangerous sect of the Nazarenes. These facts go to 
prove, not that Paul is a traitor to his own people, still 
less that he is a Pharisee at heart, preaching Gentile 
liberty from interested motives ; but that it must have 
been some extraordinary occurrence, quite out of the 
common run of human influences and probabilities, that 
set him on his present course. What could have 
turned this furious Jewish persecutor all at once into 
the champion of the cross? What indeed but the 
revelation of Christ which he received at the Damascus 


es ee 


64 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





gate? His previous career up to that hour had been 
such as to make it impossible that he should have 
received his gospel through human means. The chasm 
between his Christian and pre-Christian life had only 
been bridged by a supernatural interposition of the 
mercy of Christ. 

Our modern critics, however, think that they know 
Paul better than he knew himself. They hold that the 
problem raised by this passage is capable of a natural 
solution. Psychological analysis, we are told, sets 
the matter in a different light. Saul of Tarsus had a 
tender conscience. Underneath his fevered and am- 
bitious zeal, there lay in the young persecutor’s heart 
a profound misgiving, a mortifying sense of his 
failure, and the failure of his people, to attain the 
righteousness of the Law. The seventh chapter of 
his Epistle to the Romans is a leaf taken out of the 
inner history of this period of the Apostle’s life. 
Through what a stern discipline the Tarsian youth had 
passed in these legal years! How his haughty spirit 
chafed and tortured itself under the growing con- 
sciousness of its moral impotence! The Law had 
been truly his wasdayaryos (ch. iii. 24), a severe tutor, 
preparing him unconsciously “for Christ.” In this 
state of mind such scenes as the martyrdom of Stephen 
could not but powerfully affect Saul, in spite of him- 
self. The bearing of the persecuted Nazarenes, the 
words of peace and forgiveness that they uttered under 
their sufferings, stirred questicnings in his breast not 
always to be silenced. Self-distrust and remorse were 
secretly undermining the rigour of his Judaic faith, 
They acted like a “goad” (Acts xxvi. 14), against 
which he “kicked in vain.” He rode to Damascus—a 
long and lonely journey—in a state of increasing dis- 


i1r-14.] PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 65 


quiet and mental conflict. The heat and exhaustion of 
the desert march, acting on a nervous temperament 
naturally excitable and overwrought, hastened the crisis. 
Saul fell from his horse in an access of fever, or cata- 
lepsy. His brain was on fire. The convictions that 
haunted him suddenly took form and voice in the appari- 
tion of the glorified Jesus, whom Stephen in his dying 
moments had addressed. From that figure seemed to 
proceed the reproachful cry which the persecutor’s con- 
science had in vain been striving to make him hear. A 
flash of lightning, or, if you like, a sunstroke, is readily 
imagined to fire this train of circumstances,—and the 
explanation is complete! When, besides, M. Renan is 
good enough to tell us that he has himself ‘‘experienced 
an attack of this kind at Byblos,” and “ with other 
principles would certainly have taken the hallucinations 
he then had for visions,”* what more can we desire ? 
Nay, does not Paul himself admit, in ver. 16 of this 
chapter, that his conversion was essentially a spiritual 
and subjective event ? 

Such is the diagnosis of Paul’s conversion offered us 
by rationalism ; and it is not wanting in boldness nor 
in skill But the corner-stone on which it rests, the 
hinge of the whole theory, is imaginary and in fatal 
contradiction with the facts of the case. Paul himself 
knows nothing of the remorse imputed to him previously 
to the vision of Jesus. The historian of the Acts knows 
nothing of it. In a nature so upright and conscien- 
tious as that of Saul, this misgiving would at least have 
induced him to desist from persecution. From first to 
last his testimony is, “I did it zgvorantly, in unbelief.” 
It was this ignorance, this absence of any sense of 


* Les Apitres, p. 180, note I. 


66 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





wrong in the violence he used against the followers of 
Jesus, that, in his view, accounted for his “ obtain- 
ing mercy” (1 Tim. i. 13). If impressions of an 
opposite kind were previously struggling in his mind, 
with such force that on a mere nervous shock they were 
ready to precipitate themselves in the shape of an over- 
mastering hallucination, changing instantly and for ever 
the current of his life, how comes it that the Apostle 
has told us nothing about them ? That he should have 
forgotten impressions so poignant and so powerful, is 
inconceivable. And if he has of set purpose ignored, 
nay, virtually denied this all-important fact, what be- 
comes of his sincerity ? 

The Apostle was manifestly innocent of any such 
predisposition to Christian faith as the above theory 
imputes to him. True, he was conscious in those 
Judaistic days of his failure to attain righteousness, 
of the disharmony existing between “the law of his 
reason” and that which wrought “in his members.” 
His conviction of sin supplied the moral precondition 
necessary in every case to saving faith in Christ. But 
this negative condition does not help us in the least to 
explain the vision of the glorified Jesus. By no psycho- 
logical process whatever could the experience of Rom. 
vil. 7—24 be made to project itself in such an appari- 
tion. With all his mysticism and emotional suscepti- 
bility, Paul’s mind was essentially sane and critical. 
To call him epileptic is a calumny. No man so diseased 
could have gone through the Apostle’s labours, or 
written these Epistles. His discussion of the subject 
of supernatural gifts, in 1 Cor. xii. and xiv., is a 
model of shrewdness and good sense. He had ex- 
perience of trances and ecstatic visions; and he knew, 
perhaps as well as M, Renan, how to distinguish them 


i. 11-14.] PAUL'S GOSPEL REVEALED BY CHRIST. 67 





from objective realities.* The manner in which he 
speaks of this appearance allows of no reasonable doubt 
as to the Apostle’s full persuasion that “in sober 
certainty of waking sense” he had seen Jesus our 
Lord. 

It was this sensible and outward revelation that led 
to the inward revelation of the Redeemer to his soul, of 
which Paul goes on to speak in ver. 16. Without the 
latter the former would have been purposeless and 
useless. The objective vision could only have revealed 
a “Christ after the flesh,” had it not been the means of 
opening Saul’s closed heart to the influence of the Spirit 
of Christ. It was the means to this, and in the given 
circumstances the indispensable means. 

To a history that “knows no miracles,” the Apostle 
Paul must remain an enigma. His faith in the crucified 
Jesus is equally baffling to naturalism with that of the 
first disciples, who had laid Him in the grave. When 
the Apostle argues that his antecedent relations to 
Christianity were such as to preclude his conversion 
having come about by natural human means, we are 
bound to admit both the sincerity and the conclusive- 
ness of his appeal. 


* 1 Cor. xiv. 18; 2 Cor. xii, i—6 ; Acts xvi. 9; xviii. 8, 9; xxii, 17, 18. 


CHAPTER V. 
PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 


** But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even 
from my mother’s womb, and called me through His grace, to reveal 
His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the Gentiles ; imme- 
diately I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to 
Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me: but I went away 
into Arabia ; and again I returned unto Damascus.”—GAL. i. I5—17. 


Fj T pleased God to reveal His Son in me: this is after 

all the essential matter in Paul’s conversion, as in 
that of every Christian. The outward manifestation of 
Jesus Christ served in his case to bring about this 
result, and was necessary to qualify him for his 
extraordinary vocation. But of itself the supernatural 
vision had no redeeming virtue, and gave Saul of 
Tarsus no message of salvation for the world. Its 
glory blinded and prostrated the persecutor ; his heart 
might notwithstanding have remained rebellious and 
unchanged. ‘Iam Jesus,” said the heavenly Form,— 
“Go, and it shall be told thee what thou shalt do” ;— 
that was all! And that was not salvation. ‘“ Even 
though one rose from the dead,” still it is possible not 
to believe. And faith is possible in its highest degree, 
and is exercised to-day by multitudes, with no celestial 
light to illumine, no audible voice from beyond the 
grave to awaken. The sixteenth verse gives us the 
inward counterpart of that exterior revelation in which 


i, 15-17.] PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 69 





Paul’s knowledge of Christ had its beginning,—but 
only its beginning. 

The Apostle does not surely mean by “in me,” 77 
my case, through me (to others). This gives a sense 
true in itself, and expressed by Paul elsewhere (ver. 24 ; 
1 Tim. i. 16), but unsuitable to the word ‘ reveal,” and 
out of place at this point of the narrative. In the next 
clause—‘‘ that I might preach Him among the Gentiles ” 
—we learn what was to be the issue of this revelation 
for the world. But in the first place it was a Divine 
certainty within the breast of Paul himself. His Gentile 
Apostleship rested upon the most assured basis of 
inward conviction, upon a spiritual apprehension of the 
Redeemer’s person. He says, laying emphasis on the 
last two words, “to reveal His Son within me.” So 
Chrysostom: Why did he not say fo me, but in me ? 
Showing that not by words alone he learned the things 
concerning faith ; but that he was also filled with the 
abundance of the Spirit, the revelation shining through 
his very soul; and that he had Christ speaking in himself. 

I. The substance of Paul's gospel was, therefore, given 
him by the unveiling of the Redeemer to his heart. 

The ‘“‘revelation” of ver. 16 takes up and completes 
that of ver. 12. The dazzling appearance of Christ 
before his eyes and the summons of His voice addressed 
to Saul’s bodily ears formed the special mode in which 
it pleased God to “call him by His grace.” But 
“whom He called, He also justified.” In this further 
act of grace salvation is first personally realised, and 
the gospel becomes the man’s individual possession. 
This experience ensued upon the acceptance of the fact 
that the crucified Jesus was the Christ. But this was 
by no means all. As the revelation penetrated further 
into the Apostle’s soul, he began to apprehend its 


70 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


deeper significance. He knew already that the 
Nazarene had claimed to be the Son of God, and on 
that ground had been sentenced to death by the 
Sanhedrim. His resurrection, now a demonstrated 
fact, showed that this awful claim, instead of being 
condemned, was acknowledged by God Himself. The 
celestial majesty in which He appeared, the sublime 
authority with which He spoke, witnessed to His 
Divinity. To Paul equally with the first Apostles, He 
‘(was declared Son of God in power, by the resur- 
rection of the dead.” But this persuasion was borne 
in upon him in his after reflections, and could not 
be adequately realised in the first shock of his great 
discovery. The language of this verse throws no sort 
of suspicion on the reality of the vision before Damascus. 
Quite the opposite. The inward presupposes the 
outward. Understanding follows sight. The subjective 
illumination, the inward conviction of Christ’s Divinity, 
in Paul’s case as in that of the first disciples, was 
brought about by the appearance of the risen, Divine 
Jesus. That appearance furnishes in both instances 
the explanation of the astounding change that took 
place in the men. The heart full of blasphemy against 
His name has learnt to own Him as “ the Son of God, 
who loved me and gave Himself for me.” Through 
the bodily eyes of Saul of Tarsus the revelation of 
Jesus Christ had entered and transformed his spirit. 
Of this interior revelation the Holy Spirit, according 
to the Apostle’s doctrine, had heen the organ. The 
Lord on first meeting the gathered Apostles after His 
resurrection “breathed upon them, saying, Receive ye 
the Holy Ghost” (John xx. 22). This influence was 
in truth “the power of His resurrection”; it was the 
inspiring breath of the new life of humanity issuing 


i. 15-17. PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 71 


from the open grave of Christ. The baptism of 
Pentecost, with its “ mighty rushing wind,” was but 
the fuller effusion of the power whose earnest the 
Church received in that gentle breathing of peace on 
the day of the resurrection. By His Spirit Christ 
made Himself a dwelling in the hearts of His disciples, 
raised at last to atrue apprehension of His nature. All 
this was recapitulated in the experience of Paul. In 
his case the common experience was the more sharply 
defined because of the suddenness of his conversion, 
and the startling effect with which this new conscious- 
ness projected itself upon the background of his earlier 
Pharisaic life. Paul had his Resurrection-vision on 
the road to Damascus. He received his Pentecostal 
baptism in the days that followed. 

It is not necessary to fix the precise occasion of the 
second revelation, or to connect it specifically with the 
visit of Ananias to Saul in Damascus, much less with 
his later “ecstasy” in the temple (Acts ix. I0—19; 
xxii. 12—21). When Ananias, sent by Christ, brought 
him the assurance of forgiveness from the injured 
Church, and bade_him “recover his sight, and be filled 
with the Holy Ghost,” this message greatly comforted 
his heart, and pointed out to him more clearly the 
_way of salvation along which he was groping. But 
it is the office of the Spirit of God to reveal the Son 
of God; so Paul teaches everywhere in his Epistles, 
taught first by his own experience. Not from Ananias, 
nor from any man had he received this knowledge ; 
God revealed His Son in the soul of the Apostle— 
“sent forth the Spirit of His Son into his heart” 
(ch. iv. 6). The language of 2 Cor. iii. 12—iv. 6 
is the best commentary on this verse. A veil rested 
on the heart of Saul the Pharisee. He read the Old 


72 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Covenant only in the condemning letter. Not yet did 
he know ‘the Lord” who is “the spirit.” This veil 
was done away in Christ. “The glory of the Lord” 
that burst upon him in his Damascus journey, rent it 
once and for ever from his eyes. God, the Light-giver, 
had ‘‘shined in his heart, in the face of Jesus Christ.” 
Such was the further scope of the revelation which 
effected Paul’s conversion. As he writes afterwards 
to Ephesus, ‘‘the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the 
Father of glory, had given him a spirit of wisdom and 
revelation in the knowledge of Christ; eyes of the 
heart enlightened to know the hope of His calling, 
and His exceeding power to usward, according to that 
He wrought in Christ when he raised Him from the 
dead, and set Him at His own right hand” (Eph. i. 
17—21). In these words we hear an echo of the 
thoughts that passed through the Apostle’s mind when 
first ‘‘ it pleased God in him to reveal His Son.” 

Il. Zn the light of this inner revelation Paul received 
his Gentile mission. 

He speedily perceived that this was the purpose 
with which the revelation was made: ‘that I should 
preach Him among the Gentiles.” The three accounts 
of his conversion furnished by the Acts witness to 
the same effect. Whether we should suppose that the . 
Lord Jesus gave Saul this commission directly, at His 
first appearance, as seems to be implied in Acts xxvi., 
or infer from the more detailed narrative of chapters 
ix. and xxii, that the announcement was sent by 
Ananias and afterwards more urgently repeated in 
the vision at the Temple, in either case the fact remains 
the same; from the beginning Paul knew that he was 
appointed to be Christ's witness to the Gentiles. This 
destination was included in the Divine call which 


1. 1§-27.] PAUL’S DIVINE COMMISSION. 73 


brought him to faith in Jesus. His Judaic prejudices 
were swept away. He was ready to embrace the 
universalism of the Gospel. With his fine logical in- 
stinct, sharpened by hatred, he had while yet a Pharisee 
discerned more clearly than many Jewish Christians the 
bearing of the doctrine of the cross upon the legal 
system. He saw that the struggle was one of life and 
death. The vehemence with which he flung himself into 
the contest was due to this perception. But it followed 
from this, that, once convinced of the Messiahship of 
Jesus, Paul’s faith at a bound overleaped all Jewish 
barriers. ‘ Judaism—or the religion of the Crucified,” 
was the alternative with which his stern logic pursued 
the Nazarenes. Judaism and Christianity—this was 
a compromise intolerable to his nature. Before Saul’s 
conversion he had left that halting-place behind; he 
apprehended already, in some sense, the truth up to 
which the elder Apostles had to be educated, that “in 
Christ Jesus there is neither Greek nor Jew.” He passed 
at a step from the one camp to the other. In this 
there was consistency. The enlightened, conscientious 
persecutor, who had debated with Stephen and helped 
to stone him, was sure, if he became a Christian, to 
become a Christian of Stephen’s school. When he 
entered the Church, Paul left the Synagogue. He was 
ripe for his world-wide commission. There was no 
surprise, no unpreparedness in his mind when the 
charge was given him, “Go; for I will send thee far 
hence among the Gentiles.” 

In the Apostle’s view, his personal salvation and 
that of the race were objects united from the first. Not 
as a privileged Jew, but as a sinful man, the Divine 
grace had found him out. The righteousness of God 
was revealed to him on terms which brought it within 


74 THE LTISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





the reach of every human being. The Son of God 
whom he now beheld was a personage vastly greater 
than his national Messiah, the “‘ Christ after the flesh” 
of his Jewish dreams, and His gospel was correspond- 
ingly loftier and larger in its scope. “God was in 
Christ, reconciling,” not a nation, but “a world unto 
Himself.” The “grace” conferred on him was given 
that he might “ preach among the Gentiles Christ’s un- 
searchable riches, and make all men see the mystery” 
of the counsel of redeeming love (Eph. iii. 1—11). It 
was the world’s redemption of which Paul partook ; and 
it was his business to let the world know it. He had 
fathomed the depths of sin and self-despair ; he had 
tasted the uttermost of pardoning grace. God and the 
world met in his single soul, and were reconciled. He 
felt from the first what he expresses in his latest Epistles, 
that “the grace of God which appeared” to him, was 
“for the salvation of all men” (Tit. ii. 11). “ Faith- 
ful is the saying, and worthy of ali acceptation, that 
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners, of 
whom I am chief” (1 Tim. i. 15). The same revela- 
tion that made Paul a Christian, made him the Apostle 
of mankind. 

III. For this vocation the Apostle had been destined by 
God from the beginning. ‘It pleased God to do this,” 
he says, ‘who had marked me out from my mother’s 
womb, and called me by His grace.” 

While “ Saul was yet breathing out threatening and 
slaughter” against the disciples of Jesus, how difterent 
a future was being prepared for him! How little can 
we forecast the issue of our own plans, or of those we 
form for others. His Hebrew birth, his rabbinical 
proficiency, the thoroughness with which he had 
mastered the tenets of Legalism, had fitted him like no 


i. 15-17.] PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 75 


other to be the bearer of the Gospel to the Gentiles. 
This Epistle proves the fact. Only a graduate of the 
best Jewish schools could have written it. Paul’s 
master, Gamaliel, if he had read the letter, must per- 
force have been proud of his scholar; he would have 
feared more than ever that those who opposed the 
Nazarene might “haply be found fighting against 
God.” The Apostle foils the Judaists with their own 
weapons. He knows every inch of the ground on 
which the battle is waged. At the same time, he 
was a born Hellenist and a citizen of the Empire, 
native “of no mean city.” Tarsus, his birthplace, 
was the capital of an important Roman province, and 
a centre of Greek culture and refinement. In spite of 
the Hebraic conservatism of Saul’s family, the genial 
atmosphere of such a town could not but affect the 
early development of so sensitive a nature. He had 
sufficient tincture of Greek letters and conversance 
with Roman law to make him a true cosmopolitan, 
qualified to be “all things to all men.” He presents 
an admirable example of that versatility and suppleness 
of genius which have distinguished for so many ages 
the sons of Jacob, and enable them to find a home and 
a market for their talents in every quarter of the world. 
Paul was “a chosen vessel, to bear the name of Jesus 
before Gentiles and kings, and the sons of Israel.” 

But his mission was concealed till the appointed 
hour. Thinking of his personal election, he reminds 
himself of the words spoken to Jeremiah touching his 
prophetic call. “Before I formed thee in the belly I 
knew thee; and before thou camest out of the womb 
I sanctified thee. I appointed thee a prophet unto the 
nations” (Jer. i. 5). Or like the Servant of the Lord 
in Isaiah he might say, “The Lord hath called me 


76 _LHE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

from the womb; from the bowels of my mother hath 
He made mention of my name. And He hath made 
my mouth like a sharp sword, in the shadow of His 
hand hath He hid me; and He hath made me a 
polished shaft, in His quiver hath He kept me close” 
(Isa. xlix. 1, 2). This belief in a fore-ordaining Pro- 
vidence, preparing in secret its chosen instruments, so 
deeply rooted in the Old Testament faith, was not want- 
ing to Paul. His career is a signal illustration of its 
truth. He applies it, in his doctrine of Election, to the 
history of every child of grace. “Whom He foreknew, 
He did predestinate. Whom He did predestinate, 
He called.” Once more we see how the Apostle’s 
theology was moulded by his experience. 

The manner in which Saul of Tarsus had been pre- 
pared all his life long for the service of Christ, magnified 
to his eyes the sovereign grace of God. “He called 
me through His grace.” The call came at precisely the 
fit time ; it came at a time and in a manner calculated 
to display the Divine compassion in the highest possible 
degree. This lesson Paul could never forget. To the 
last he dwells upon it with deep emotion. “In me,” 
he writes to Timothy, “ Jesus Christ first showed forth 
all His longsuffering. I was a blasphemer, a persecutor, 
insolent and injurious; but I obtained merey” (1 Tim. 
i. 13—16). He was so dealt with from the beginning, he 
had been called to the knowledge of Christ under such 
circumstances that he felt he had a right to say, above 
other men, ‘“ By the grace of God I am what I am.” 
The predestination under which his life was con- 
ducted “from his mother’s womb,” had for its chief 
purpose, to exhibit God’s mercy to mankind, “that in 
the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches 
of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus” 


i. 15-17.) PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 17 


(Eph. ii. 7). To this purpose, so soon as he discerned 
it, he humbly yielded himself. The Son of God, whose 
followers he had hunted to death, whom in his madness 
he would have crucified afresh, had appeared to him to 
save and to forgive. The grace of it, the infinite kind- 
ness and compassion such an act revealed in the Divine 
nature, excited new wonder in the Apostle’s soul till 
his latest hour. Henceforth he was the bondman of 
grace, the celebrant of grace. His life was one act 
of thanksgiving “to the praise of the glory of His 
grace !” 

IV. From Jesus Christ in person Paul had received 
his knowledge of the Gospel, without human interven- 
tion. In the revelation of Christ to his soul he 
possessed the substance of the truth he was afterwards 
to teach; and with the revelation there came the com- 
mission to proclaim it to all men. His gospel-message 
was in its essence complete; the Apostleship was 
already his. Such are the assertions the Apostle makes 
in reply to his gainsayers. And he goes on to show 
that the course he took after his conversion sustains these 
lofty claims: “‘ When God had been pleased to reveal 
His Son in me, immediately (right from the first) 
I took no counsel with flesh and blood. I avoided 
repairing to Jerusalem, to the elder Apostles; I went 
away into Arabia, and back again to Damascus. It was 
three years before I set foot in Jerusalem.” 

If that were so, how could Paul have received his 
doctrine or his commission from the Church of Jeru- 
salem, as his traducers alleged ? He acted from the 
outset under the sense of a unique Divine call, that 
allowed of no human validation or supplement. Had 
the case been otherwise, had Paul come to his know- 
ledge of Christ by ordinary channels, his first impulse 


78 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
would have been to go up to the mother city to report 
himself there, and to gain further instruction. Above 
all, if he intended to be a minister of Christ, it would 
have been proper to secure the approval of the Twelve, 
and to be accredited from Jerusalem. This was the 
course which “ flesh and blood” dictated, which Saul’s 
new friends at Damascus probably urged upon him. 
It was insinuated that he had actually proceeded in 
this way, and put himself under the direction of Peter 
and the Judean Church. But he says, “I did nothing 
of the sort. I kept.clear of Jerusalem for three years ; 
and then I only went there to make private acquain- 
tance with Peter, and stayed in the city but a fortnight.” 
Although Paul did not for many years make public 
claim to rank with the Twelve, from the commencement 
he acted in conscious independence of them. He calls 
them “ Apostles before me,” by this phrase assuming 
the matter in dispute. He tacitly asserts his equality 
in official status with the Apostles of Jesus, assigning 
to the others precedence only in point of time. And 
he speaks of this equality in terms implying that it 
was already present to his mind at this former period. 
Under this conviction he held aloof from human guidance 
and approbation. Instead of “ going up to Jerusalem,” 
the centre of publicity, the head-quarters of the rising 
Church, Paul ‘‘ went off into Arabia.” 

There were, no doubt, other reasons for this step. 
Why did he choose Arabia for his sojourn ? and what, 
pray, was he doing there ? The Apostle leaves us to our 
own conjectures. Solitude, we imagine, was his principal 
object. His Arabian retreat reminds us of the Arabian 
exile of Moses, of the wilderness discipline of John the 
Baptist, and the “ forty days” of Jesus in the wilder- 
ness. In each of these instances, the desert retirement 


i. 15-17.] PAUL'S DIVINE COMMISSION. 79 


followed upon a great inward crisis, and was prepara- 
tory to the entrance of the Lord’s servant on his 
mission to the world. Elijah, at a later period of his 
course, sought the wilderness under motives not dis- 
similar. After such a convulsion as Paul had passed 
through, with a whole world of new ideas and emotions 
pouring in upon him, he felt that he must be alone; he 
must get away from the voices of men. There are 
such times in the history of every earnest soul. In 
the silence of the Arabian desert, wandering amid the 
grandest scenes of ancient revelation, and communing 
in stillness with God and with his own heart, the young 
Apostle will think out the questions that press upon 
him; he will be able to take a calmer survey of the 
new world into which he has been ushered, and will 
learn to see clearly and walk steadily in the heavenly 
light that at first bewildered him. So “the Spirit 
immediately driveth him out into the wilderness.” In 
Arabia one confers, not with flesh and blood, but with 
the mountains and with God. From Arabia Saul 
returned in possession of himself, and of his gospel. 
The Acts of the Apostles omits this Arabian episode 
(Acts ix. I9—25). But for what Paul tells us here, we 
should have gathered that he began at once after his 
baptism to preach Christ in Damascus, his preaching 
after no long time* exciting Jewish enmity to such a 
pitch that his life was imperilled, and the Christian 
brethren compelled him to seek safety by flight to 
Jerusalem. The reader of Luke is certainly surprised 
to find a period of three years,f with a prolonged 





* juépa ixavat, a considerable time. The expression is indefinite. 

t+ Ver. 18: that is, parts of ‘‘three years,” according to ancient 
reckoning—say from 36 to 38 A.D., possibly less than two in actual 
duration, 


80 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS 





residence in Arabia, interpolated between Paul’s con- 
version and his reception in Jerusalem. Luke's silence, 
we judge, is intentional. The Arabian retreat formed 
no part of the Apostle’s public life, and had no place in 
the narrative of the Acts. Paul only mentions it here 
in the briefest terms, and because the reference was 
necessary to put his relations to the first Apostles in 
their proper light. For the time the converted Saul 
had dropped out of sight; and the historian of the Acts 
respects his privacy. 

The place of the Arabian journey seems to us to lie 
between vv. 21 and 22 of Acts ix. That passage gives 
a twofold description of Paul’s preaching in Damascus, 
in its earlier and later stages, with a double note of 
time (vv. 19 and 23). Saul’s first testimony, taking place 
“straightway,” was, one would presume, a mere declara- 
tion of faithin Jesus : “In the synagogues he proclaimed 
Jesus, (saying) that He is the Son of God” (R.V.), 
language in striking harmony with that of the Apostle 
in the text (vv. 12, 16). Naturally this recantation 
caused extreme astonishment in Damascus, where Saul’s 
reputation was well-known both to Jews and Chris- 
tians, and his arrival was expected in the character of 
Jewish inquisitor-in-chief. Ver. 22 presents a different 
situation. Paul is now preaching in his established 
and characteristic style; as we read it, we might fancy 
we hear him debating in the synagogues of Pisidian 
Antioch or Corinth or Thessalonica: “ He was con- 
founding the Jews, proving that this is the Christ.” 
Neither Saul himself nor his Jewish hearers in the 
first days after his conversion would be in the mood 
for the sustained argumentation and Scriptural dialectic 
thus described. The explanation of the change lies 
behind the opening words of the verse: “But Saul 


iL. 15-19.] PAULS DIVINE COMMISSION. 81 


increased in strength ”—a growth due not only to the 
prolonged opposition he had to encounter, but still 
more, aS we conjecture from this hint of the Apostle, 
to the period of rest and reflection which he enjoyed 
in his Arabian seclusion, The two marks of time 
given us in vv. 19 and 23 of Luke’s narrative, may be 
fairly distinguished from each other—‘“ certain days,” 
and “sufficient days” (or “a considerable time”)— 
as denoting a briefer and a longer season respectively : 
the former so short that the excitement caused by 
Saul’s declaration of his new faith had not yet subsided 
when he withdrew from the city into the desert—in 
which case Luke’s note of time does not really conflict 
with Paul’s “immediately”; the latter affording a 
lapse of time sufficient for Saul to develope his argu- 
ment for the Messiahship of Jesus, and to provoke the 
Jews, worsted in logic, to resort to other weapons. 
From Luke’s point of view the sojourn in Arabia, how- 
ever extended, was simply an incident, of no public 
importance, in Paul’s early ministry in Damascus. 

The disappearance of Saul during this interval helps 
however, as we think, to explain a subsequent statement 
in Luke’s narrative that is certainly perplexing (Acts 
ix. 26, 27). When Saul, after his escape from Damas- 
cus, “‘was come to Jerusalem,” and “essayed to join 
himself to the disciples,” they, we are told, ‘“ were all 
afraid of him, not believing that he was a’ disciple !* 
For while the Church at Jerusalem had doubtless heard 
at the time of Saul’s marvellous conversion three years 
before, his long retirement and avoidance of Jerusalem 
threw an air of mystery and suspicion about his proceed- 
ings, and revived the fears of the Judean brethren ; and 
his reappearance created a panic. In consequence of 
his sudden departure from Damascus, it is likely that 

6 


82 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





no public report had as yet reached Judzea of Saul's 
return to that city and his renewed ministry there. 
Barnabas now came forward to act as sponsor for the 
suspected convert. What induced him to do this— 
whether it was that his largeness of heart enabled him 
to read Saul’s character better than others, or whether 
he had some earlier private acquaintance with the 
Tarsian—we cannot tell. The account that Barnabas 
was able to give of his friend’s conversion and of his 
bold confession in Damascus, won for Paul the place 
in the confidence of Peter and the leaders of the Church 
at Jerusalem which he never afterwards lost. 

The two narratives—the history of Luke and the 
letter of Paul—relate the same series of events, but 
from almost opposite standpoints. Luke dwells upon 
Pauls connection with the Church at Jerusalem and 
its Apostles. Paul is maintaining his independence of 
them. There is no contradiction ; but there is just such 
discrepancy as will arise where two honest and compet- 
ent witnesses are relating identical facts in a different 
connection. 


CRAPTER VE. 
PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 


**The nafter three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas, and 
tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the apostles saw I none, 
but only James the Lord’s brother. Now touching the things which 
I write unto you, behold, before God, I lie not. Then I came into the 
regions of Syria and Cilicia. And I was still unknown by face unto 
the churches of Judzea which were in Christ: but they only heard say, 
He that once persecuted us now preacheth the faith of which he once 
made havock ; and they glorified God in me.”—GAL. i. 18—24. 


OR the first two years of his Christian life, Paul 
held no intercourse whatever with the Church 

at Jerusalem and its chiefs. Hisrelation with them was 
commenced by the visit he paid to Peter in the third year 
after his conversion. And that relation was more pre- 
cisely determined and made public when, after success- 
fully prosecuting for fourteen years his mission to the 
heathen, the Apostle again went up to Jerusalem to 
defend the liberty of the Gentile Church (ch. ii. I—10). 
A clear understanding of this course of events was 
essential to the vindication of Paul’s position in the 
eyes of the Galatians. The “troublers” told them that 
Paul’s doctrine was not that of the mother Church; 
that his knowledge of the gospel and authority to 
preach it came from the elder Apostles, with whom 
since his attack upon Peter at Antioch he was at open 
variance. They themselves had come down from 
Judzea on purpose to set his pretensions in their true 


light, and to teach the Gentiles the way of the Lord 
more perfectly. 

Modern rationalism has espoused the cause of these 
“ deceitful workers” (2 Cor. xi. 13—15). It endea- 
vours to rehabilitate the Judaistic party. The “criti- 
cal” school maintain that the oppositien of the 
Circumcisionists to the Apostle Paul was perfectly 
legitimate. They hold that the “ pseud-apostles” of 
Corinth, the “certain from James,” the “troublers” and 
“false brethren privily brought in” of this Epistle, did 
in truth represent, as they claimed to do, the principles 
of the Jewish Christian Church; and that there was a 
radical divergence between the Pauline and Petrine 
gospels, of which the two Apostles were fully aware 
from the time of their encounter at Antioch. However 
Paul may have wished to disguise the fact to himself, 
the teaching of the Twelve was identical, we are told, 
with that “ other gospel” on which he pronounces his 
anathema ; the original Church of Jesus never emanci- 
pated itself from the trammels of legalism ; the Apostle 
Paul, and not his Master, was in reality the author of 
evangelical doctrine, the founder of the catholic Church. 
The conflict between Peter and Paul at Antioch, 
related in this Epistle, supplies, in the view of Baur 
and his followers, the key to the history of the Early 
Church. The Ebionite assumption of a personal rivalry 
between the two Apostles and an intrinsic opposition in 
their doctrine, hitherto regarded as the invention of a 
desperate and decaying heretical sect, these ingenious 
critics have adopted for the basis of their “ scientific” 
reconstruction of the New Testament. Paul’s Judaizing 
hinderers and troublers are to be canonized; and the 
pseudo-Clementine writings, forsooth, must take the 
place of the discredited Acts of the Apostles. Verily 


4 
@ 


i. 18-24.] PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 85 
“the whirligig of time hath its revenges.” To empanel 
Paul on his accusers’ side, and to make this Epistle 
above all convict him of heterodoxy, is an attempt 
which dazzles by its very daring. 

Let us endeavour to form a clear conception of the 
facts touching Paul’s connection with the first Apostles 
and his attitude and feeling towards the Jewish Church, 
as they are in evidence in the first two chapters of this 
Epistle. 

I. On the one hand, it is clear that the Gentile 
Apostle’s relations to Peter and the Twelve were those 
of personal independence and official equality. 

This is the aspect of the case on which Paul lays 
stress. His sceptical critics argue that under his 
assertion of independence there is concealed an opposi- 
tion of principle, a ‘‘ radical divergence.” The sense of 
independence is unmistakable. It is on that side that 
the Apostle seeks to guard himself. With this aim 
he styles himself at the outset “an Apostle not from 
men, nor by man”—neither man-made nor man-sent. 
Such apostles there were; and in this character, we 
imagine, the Galatian Judaistic teachers, like those of 
Corinth,* professed to appear, as the emissaries of the 
Church in Jerusalem and the authorised exponents of 
the teaching of the “pillars” there. Paul is an Apostle 
at first-hand, taking his commission directly from Jesus 
Christ. In that quality he pronounces his benediction 
and his anathema. To support this assumption he has 
shown how impossible it was in point of time and cir- 
cumstances that he should have been beholden for his 
gospel to the Jerusalem Church and the elder Apostles. 
So far as regarded the manner of his conversion and 








* 2 Cor. xi. 133 iii, I—3. See the remarks on the word AZostle in 
Chapter I. p. 12. 


86 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


the events of the first decisive years in which his 
Christian principles and vocation took their shape, his 
position had been altogether detached and singular ; 
the Jewish Apostles could in no way claim him for 
their son in the gospel. 

But at last, “after three years,” Saul “did go up to 
Jerusalem.” What was it for? To report himself to 
the authorities of the Church and place himself under 
their direction? To seek Peter’s instruction, in order to 
obtain a more assured knowledge of the gospel he had 
embraced? Nothing of the kind. Not even “to question 
Cephas,” as some render iotopjcat, following an older 
classical usage—“ to gain information” from him; but 
“T went up fo make acquaintance with Cephas.” Saul 
went to Jerusalem carrying in his heart the conscious- 
ness of his high vocation, seeking, as an equal with an 
equal, to make personal acquaintance with the leader of 
the Twelve. Cephas (as he was called at Jerusalem) 
must have been at this time to Paul a profoundly 
interesting personality. He was the one man above 
all others whom the Apostle felt he must get to know, 
with whom it was necessary for him to have a thorough 
understanding. 

How momentous was this meeting! How much we 
could wish to know what passed between these two in 
the conversations of the fortnight they spent together. 
One can imagine the delight with which Peter would 
relate to his listener the scenes of the life of Jesus; 
how the two men would weep together at the recital of 
the Passion, the betrayal, trial and denial, the agony of 
the Garden, the horror of the cross; with what mingled 
awe and triumph he would describe the events of the 
Resurrection and the Forty Days, the Ascension, and 
the baptism of fire. In Paul’s account of the appear- 


i. 18-24.] PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 87 


ances of the risen Christ (1 Cor. xv. 4—8), written 
many years afterwards, there are statements most 
naturally explained as a recollection of what he had 
heard privately from Peter, and possibly also from 
James, at this conference. For it is in his gospel mes- 
sage and doctrine, and his Apostolic commission, not 
in regard to the details of the biography of Jesus, that 
Paul claims to be independent of tradition. And with 
what deep emotion would Peter receive in turn from 
Paul’s lips the account of his meeting with Jesus, of 
the three dark days that followed, of the message sent 
through Ananias, and the revelations made and purposes 
formed during the Arabian exile. Between two such 
men, met at such a time, there would surely be an 
entire frankness of communication and a brotherly 
exchange of convictions and of plans. In that case 
Paul could not fail to inform the elder Apostle of the 
extent of the commission he had received from their 
common Master ; although he does not appear to have 
made any public and formal assertion of his Apostolic 
dignity for a considerable time afterwards. The sup- 
position of a private cognizance on Peter’s part of 
Paul’s true status makes the open recognition which 
took place fourteen years later easy to understand 
(ch. ii. 6—10). 

“But other of the Apostles,” Paul goes on to say, 
“saw I none, but only James the brother of the Lord.’ 
James, vo Apostle surely ; neither in the higher sense, 
for he cannot be reasonably identified with “ James the 
son of Alphzeus;” nor in the lower, for he was, as far 
as we can learn, stationary at Jerusalem. But he stood 
so near the Apostles, and was in every way so impor- 
tant a person, that if Paul had omitted the name of 
James in this connection, he would have seemed to pass 


88 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

over a material fact. The reference to James in 1 Cor. 
xv. 7—a hint deeply interesting in itself, and lending so 
much dignity to the position of James—suggests that 
Paul had been at this time in confidential intercourse 
with James as well as Peter, each relating to the other 
how he had “ seen the Lord.” 

So cardinal afe the facts just stated (vv. I15—19), as 
bearing on Paul’s apostleship, and so contrary to the 
representations made by the Judaizers, that he pauses 
to call God to witness his veracity: “ Now in what I 
am writing to you, lo, before God, I lie not.” The 
Apostle never makes this appeal lightly ; but only in 
support of some averment in which his personal honour 
and his strongest feelings are involved.* It was 
alleged, with some show of proof, that Paul was an 
underling of the authorities of the Church at Jerusalem, 
and that all he knew of the gospel had been learned 
from the Twelve. From ver. I1 onwards he has 
been making a circumstantial contradiction of these 
assertions. He protests that up to the time when he 
commenced his Gentile mission, he had been under no 
man’s tutelage or tuition in respect to his knowledge of 
the gospel. He can say no more to prove his case. 
Either his opposers or himself are uttering falsehood. 
The Galatians know, or ought to know, how incapable 
he is of such deceit. Solemnly therefore he avouches, 
closing the matter so far, as if drawing himself up to 
his utmost height: “ Behold, before God, I do not 
lie!” 

But now we are confronted with the narrative of 
the Acts (chap. ix. 26—30), which renders a wry 
different account of this passage in the Apostle’s life. 


* See Rom. ix. 1; 2 Cor. i. 17, 18, 23; 1 Thess. ii. 5. 


1.18 24.] PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 89 





(To vv. 26, 27 of Luke’s narrative we have already 
alluded in the concluding paragraphs of Chapter V). 
We are told there that Barnabas introduced Saul “ to 
the Apostles”; here, that he saw none of them but 
Cephas, and only James besides. The number of the 
Apostolate present in Jerusalem at the time is a 
particular that does not engage Luke’s mind; while it 
is of the essence of Paul's affirmation. What the Acts 
relates is that Saul, through Barnabas’ intervention, 
was now received by the Apostolic fellowship as a 
Christian brother, and-as one who “‘had seen the Lord.” 
The object which Saul had in coming to Jerusalem, 
and the fact that just then Cephas was the only one of 
the Twelve to be found in the city, along with James— 
these are matters which only come into view from the 
private and personal standpoint to which Paul admits 
us. For the rest, there is certainly no contradiction 
when we read in the one report that Paul “ went up to 
make acquaintance with Cephas,” and in the other, that 
he “was with them going in and out at Jerusalem, 
preaching boldly in the name of the Lord;” that “he 
spake and disputed against the Hellenists,” moving 
their anger so violently that his life was again in 
danger, and he had to be carried down to Czesarea and 
shipped off to Tarsus. Saul was not the man to hide 
his head in Jerusalem. We can understand how 
greatly his spirit was stirred by his arrival there, and 
by the recollection of his last passage through the 
city gates. In these very synagogues of the Hellenists 
he had himself confronted Stephen; outside those 
walls he had assisted to stone the martyr. Paul’s 
address delivered many years later to the Jewish 
mob that attempted his life in Jerusalem, shows how 
deeply these remembrances troubled his soul (Acts xxii, 


a 2 om 
{ 
go THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
17—22). And they would not suffer him now to be 
silent. He hoped that his testimony to Christ, delivered 
in the spot where he had been so notorious as a 
persecutor, would produce a softening effect on his old 
companions. It was sure to affect them powerfully, 
one way or the ,other. As the event proved, it did not 
take many words from Saul’s lips to awaken against 
him the same fury that hurried Stephen to his death. 
A fortnight was time quite sufficient, under the circum- 
stances, to make Jerusalem, as we say, too hot to hold 
Saul. Nor can we wonder, knowing his love for his 
kindred, that there needed a special command from 
heaven (Acts xxii. 21), joined to the friendly compulsion 
of the Church, to induce him to yield ground and quit 
the city. But he had accomplished something; he 
had “made acquaintance with Cephas.” 

This brief visit to the Holy City was a second crisis 
in Paul’s career. He was now thrust forth upon his 
mission to the heathen. It was evident that he was 
not to look for success among his Jewish brethren. 
He lost no opportunity of appealing to them; but it 
was commonly with the same result as at Damascus 
and Jerusalem. Throughout life he carried with him 
this ‘‘ great sorrow and unceasing pain of heart,” that 
to his ‘“‘kinsmen according to the flesh,” for whose 
salvation he could consent to forfeit his own, his * 
gospel was hid. In their eyes he was a traitor to 
Israel, and must count upon their enmity. Everything 
conspired to point in one direction: ‘ Depart,” the 
Divine voice had said, ‘for I will send thee far hence 
unto the Gentiles.” And Paul obeyed. “I went,” he 
relates here, “into the regions of Syria and Cilicia” 
(ver. 21). 

To Tarsus, the Cilician capital, Saul voyaged from 





i. 18-24.] PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 91 


Judza. So we learn from Acts ix. 30. His native 
place had the first claim on the Apostle after Jerusalem, 
and afforded the best starting-point for his independent 
mission. Syria, however, precedes Cilicia in the text; 
it was the leading province of these two, in which 
Paul was occupied during the fourteen» years ensuing, 
and became the seat of distinguished Churches. In 
Antioch, the Syrian capital, Christianity was already 
planted (Acts xi. 19—21). The close connection of the 
Churches of these provinces, and their predominantly 
Gentile character, are both evident from the letter 
addressed to them subsequently by the Council of 
Jerusalem (Acts xv. 23, 24). Acts xv. 41 shows that 
a number of Christian societies owning Paul’s authority 
were found at a later time in this region. And there 
was a highroad direct from Syro-Cilicia to Galatia, 
which Paul traversed in his second visit to the latter 
country (Acts xviii. 22, 23); so that the Galatians 
would doubtless be aware of the existence of these 
older Gentile Churches, and of their relation to Paul. 
He has no need to dwell on this first chapter of his 
missionary history. After but a fortnight’s visit to 
Jerusalem, Paul went into these Gentile regions, and 
there for twice seven years—with what success was 
known to all—“ preached the faith of which once he 
made havoc.” 

This period was divided into two parts. For five 
or six years the Apostle laboured alone; afterwards in 
conjunction with Barnabas, who invited his help at 
Antioch (Acts xi. 25, 26). Barnabas was Paul’s senior, 
and had for some time held the leading position in the 
Church of Antioch; and Paul was personally indebted 
to this generous man (p. 82). He accepted the position 
of helper to Barnabas without any compromise of his 


7 


92 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


higher authority, as yet held in reserve. He accom- 
panied Barnabas to Jerusalem in 44 (or 45) A.D., with 
the contribution nade by the Syrian Church for the 
relief of the famine-stricken Judean brethren—a visit 
which Paul seems here to forget.* But the Church at 
Jerusalem was at-that time undergoing a severe per- 
secution ; its leaders were either in prison or in flight. 
The two delegates can have done little more than 
convey the moneys entrusted to them, and that with 
the utmost secrecy. . Possibly Paul on this occasion 
never set foot inside the city. In any case, the event 
had no bearing on the Apostle’s present contention. 

Between this journey and the really important visit 
to Jerusalem introduced in chap. ii. 1, Barnabas and 
Paul undertook, at the prompting of the Holy Spirit 
expressed through the Church of Antioch (Acts xiii. 
I—4), the missionary expedition described in Acts 
xiii, xiv. Under the trials of this journey the ascend- 
ancy of the younger evangelist became patent to all. 
Paul was marked out in the eyes of the Gentiles as 
their born leader, the Apostle of heathen Christianity. 
He appears to have taken the chief part in the 
discussion with the Judaists respecting circumcision, 
which immediately ensued at Antioch; and was put at 
the head of the deputation sent up to Jerusalem con- 
cerning this question. This was a turning-point in 
the Apostle’s history. It brought about the public 
recognition of his leadership in the Church. The seal 
of man was now to be set upon the secret election 
of God. 

During this long period, the Apostle tells us, he 
“remained unknown by face to the Churches of Judzea.” 





* Acts xi. 27—30. It is significant that this ministration was sent 
“*to the Elders.” 


’ 


i. 18-24.] PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 93 





Absent for so many years from the metropolis, after a 
fortnight’s flying visit, spent in private intercourse 
with Peter and james, and in controversy in the 
Hellenistic synagogues where few Christians of the 
city would be likely to follow him,* Paul was a 
stranger to the bulk of the Judean disciples. But they 
watched his course, notwithstanding, with lively interest 
and with devout thanksgiving to God (vv. 22, 23). 
Throughout this first period of his ministry the Apostle 
acted in complete independence of the Jewish Church, 
making no report to its chiefs, nor seeking any direction 
from them. Accordingly, when afterwards he did go 
up to Jerusalem and laid before the authorities there 
his gospel to the heathen, they had nothing to add 
to it; they did not take upon themselves to give him 
any advice or injunction, beyond the wish that he and 
Barnabas should “remember the poor,” as he was 
already forward to do (ch. ii. I—10). Indeed the three 
famous Pillars of the Jewish Church at this time openly 
acknowledged Paul’s equality with Peter in the Apostle- 
ship, and resigned to his direction the Gentile province. 
Finally at Antioch, the head-quarters of Gentile 
Christianity, when Peter compromised the truth of 
the gospel by yielding to Judaistic pressure, Paul had 
not hesitated publicly to reprove him (ch. ii. 11—21). 
He had been compelled in this way to carry the vindi- 
cation of his gospel to the furthest lengths ; and he had 
done this successfully. It is only when we reach the 
end of the second chapter that we discover how much 
the Apostle meant when he said, “My gospel is not 
according to man.” 


* For the ministry alluded to in Acts xxvi. 20 there were other, later 
Opportunities, especially in the journey described in Acts xv. 3; see 
also Acts xxi. 15, 16. 


94 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

If there was any man to whom as a Christian 
teacher he was bound to defer, any one who might be 
regarded as his oflicial superior, it was the Apostle 
Peter. Yet against this very Cephas he had dared 
openly to measure himself. Had he been a disciple of 
the Jewish Apostle, a servant of the Jerusalem Church, 
how would this have been possible? Had he not pos- 
sessed an authority derived immediately from Christ, 
how could he have stood out alone, against the preroga- 
tive of Peter, against the personal friendship and local 
influence of Barnabas, against the example of all his 
Jewish brethren? Nay, he was prepared to rebuke 
all the Apostles, and anathematize all the angels, 
rather than see Christ’s gospel set at nought. For it 
was in his view “the gospel of the glory of the blessed 
God, committed to my trust!” (1 Tim. i. 11). 

IJ. But while Paul stoutly maintains his indepen- 
dence, he does this in such a way as to show that there 
was no hostility or personal rivalry between himself 
and the first Apostles. His relations to the Jewish 
Church were all the while those of friendly acquaintance 
and brotherly recognition. 

That Nazarene sect which he had of old time per- 
secuted, was “the Church of God” (ver. 13). To 
the end of his life this thought gave a poignancy to 
the Apostle’s recollection of his early days. To 
“the Churches of Judzea”* he attaches the epithet a 
Christ, a phrase of peculiar depth of meaning with 
Paul, which he could never have conferred as matter 
of formal courtesy, nor by way of mere distinction 
between the Church and the Synagogue. From 


Ver. 22. It is arbitrary in Meyer to exclude from this category 
the Church of Jerusalem. 


i. 18-24.) PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 95 


Paul’s lips this title is a guarantee of orthodoxy. 
It satisfies us that the “other gospel” of the Circum- 
cisionists was very far from being the gospel of the 
Jewish Christian Church at large. Paul is careful 
to record the sympathy which the Judean brethren 
cherished for his missionary work in its earliest stages, 
although their knowledge of him was comparatively 
distant: “Only they continued to hear that our old 
persecutor is preaching the faith which once he sought 
to destroy. And in me they glorified God.” Nor does 
he drop the smallest hint to show that the disposition 
of the Churches in the mother country toward himself, 
or his judgement respecting them, had undergone any 
change up to the time of his writing this Epistle. 

He speaks of the elder Apostles in terms of unfeigned 
respect. In his reference in ch. ii. 1I—2I1 to the error 
of Peter, there is great plainness of speech, but no 
bitterness. When the Apostle says that he ‘‘ went up 
to Jerusalem to see Peter,” and describes James as 
“the Lord’s brother,” and when he refers to both of 
them, along with John, as “those accounted to be 
pillars,” can he mean anything but honour to these 
honoured men? To read into these expressions a 
covert jealousy and to suppose them written by way 
of disparagement, seems to us a strangely jaundiced 
and small-minded sort of criticism. The Apostl. 
testifies that Peter held a Divine trust in the Gospel, 
and that God had “wrought for Peter” to this 
effect, as for himself. By claiming the testimony of 
the Pillars at Jerusalem to his vocation, he shows his 
profound respect for theirs. When the unfortunate 
difference arose between Peter and himself at Antioch, 
Paul is careful to show that the Jewish Apostle on that 
occasion was influenced by the circumstances of the 


96 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


moment, and nevertheless remained true in his real 
convictions to the common gospel. 

In view of these facts, it is impossible to believe, 
as the Zendency critics would have us do, that Paul 
when he wrote this letter was at feud with the Jewish 
Church. In that case, while he taxes Peter with 
“ dissimulation” (ch. ii. 11-13), he is himself the real 
dissembler, and has carried his dissimulation to amazing 
lengths. If he is in this Epistle contending against the 
Primitive Church and its leaders, he has concealed his 
sentiments toward them with an art so crafty as to over- 
reach itself. He has taught his readers to reverence 
those whom on this hypothesis he was most concerned 
to discredit. The terms under which he refers to 
Cephas and the Judean Churches would be just so many 
testimonies against himself, if their doctrine was the 
“ other gospel” of the Galatian troublers, and if Paul 
and the Twelve were rivals for the suffrages of the 
Gentile Christians. 

The one word which wears a colour of detraction is 
the parenthesis in ver. 6 of ch. ii.: ‘‘ whatever afore- 
time* they (those of repute) were, makes no difference 
tome. God accepts no man’s person.” But this is no 
more than Paul has already said in ch. i. 16, 17. 
At the first, after receiving his gospel from the Lord in 
person, he felt it to be out of place for him to “ confer 
with flesh and blood.” So now, even in the presence 
of the first Apostles, the earthly companions of his 
Master, he cannot abate his pretensions, nor forget 
that his ministry stands on a level as exalted as theirs. 
This language is in precise accord with that of 1 Cor. 
xv. 10. The suggestion that the repeated of doxodvTes 





= We follow Lightfoot in reading the zoré as in ch, i, 23, and 
everywhere else in Paul, as a parficle of ééme. 


i. 18-24.) PAUL AND THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH. 67 


conveys a sneer against the leaders at Jerusalem, as 
“seeming” to be more than they were, is an insult to 
Paul that recoils upon the critics who utter it. The 
phrase denotes “those of repute,” ‘“‘reputed to be 
pillars,” the acknowledged heads of the mother Church. 
Their position was recognised on all hands; Paul 
assumes it, and argues upon it. He desires to magnify, 
not to minify, the importance of these illustrious men. 
They were pillars of his own cause. It is a maladroit 
interpretation that would have Paul cry down James 
and the Twelve. By so much as he impaired their 
worth, he must assuredly have impaired his own. If 
their status was mere seeming, of what value was their 
endorsement of his? But for a preconceived opinion, 
no one, we may Safely affirm, reading this Epistle 
would have gathered that Peter’s ‘“‘ gospel of the cir- 
cumcision” was the “other gospel” of Galatia, or 
that the “certain from James” of ch. ii. 12 repre- 
sented the views and the policy of the first Apostles. 
The assumption that Peter’s dissimulation at Antioch 
expressed the settled doctrine of the Jewish Apostolic 
Church, is unhistorical. The Judaizers ab used the 
authority of Peter and James when they pleaded it in 
favour of their agitation. So we are told expressly in 
Acts xv.; and a candid interpretation of this letter bears 
out the statements of Luke. In James and Peter, Paul 
and John, there were indeed “diversities of gifts and 
operations,” but they had received the same Spirit ; they 
served the same Lord. They held alike the one and 
only gospel of the grace of God, 


CHAPTER VII. 
PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 


“Then after the space of fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem 
with Barnabas, taking Titus also with me. And I went up by revela- 
tion; and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among the 
Gentiles, but privately before them who were of repute, [askiue Hem 
whether I am running, or had run, in vain: but not even Titus who 
was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. But z 
was *] because of the false brethren privily brought in, who came in 
privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they 
might bring us into bondage: to whom we gave place in the way of 
subjection, no, not for an hour ; that the truth of the gospel might con- 
tinue with you.”—GAL, ii, 1—5. 


OURTEEN years” had elapsed since Paul left 

Jerusalem for Tarsus, and commenced his Gentile 
mission.t During this long period—a full half of his 
missionary course—the Apostle was lost to the sight 
of the Judean Churches. For nearly half this time, 
until Barnabas brought him to Antioch, we have no 
further trace of his movements. But these years of 
obs¢ure labour had, we may be sure, no small influence 


* The writer is compelled in this instance to depart from the render- 
ing of the English Version, for reasons given in the sequel. See also 
a paper on Paul and Titus at Jerusalem, in THE Expositor, 3rd series, 
vol. vi., pp. 435—442. The last three words within the brackets agree 
with the R.V. margin. 

+ These fourteen years probably amounted to something less in our 
reckoning,—say, from 38 to 51 A.D. Some six years elapsed before 
Paul was summoned to Antioch, 


ii. 1-5.] PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 99 





in shaping the Apostle’s subsequent career. It was 
a kind of Apostolic apprenticeship. Then his evange- 
listic plans were laid; his powers were practised ; his 
methods of teaching and administration formed and 
tested. This first, unnoted period of Paul’s missionary 
life held, we imagine, much the same relation to his 
public ministry that the time of the Arabian retreat did 
to his spiritual development. 

We are ant to think of the Apostle Paul only as we 
see him in the full tide of his activity, carrying ‘ from 
Jerusalem round about unto Illyricum” the standard of 
the cross and planting it in one after another of the 
great cities of the Empire, “always triumphing in every 
place;” or issuing those mighty Epistles whose voice 
shakes the world. We forget the earlier term of pre- 
paration, these years of silence and patience, of un- 
recorded toil in a comparatively narrow and humble 
sphere, which had after all their part in making Paul 
the man he was. If Christ Himself would not “clutch” 
at His Divine prerogatives (Phil. ii. 5—11), nor win 
them by self-assertion and before the time, how much 
more did it become His servant to rise to his great 
office by’slow degrees. Paul served first as a private 
missionary pioneer in his native land, then as a junior 
colleague and assistant to Barnabas, until the summons 
came to take a higher place, when “the signs of an 
Apostle” had been fully “wrought in him.” Not 
in a day, nor by the effect of a single revelation did he 
become the fully armed and all-accomplished Apostle 
of the Gentiles whom we meet in this Epistle. “ After 
the space of fourteen years” it was time for him to 
stand forth the approved witness and minister of Jesus 
Christ, whom Peter and John publicly embraced as their 
equal. 





100 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Paul claims here the initiative in the momentous 
visit to Jerusalem undertaken by himself and Barnabas, 
of which he is going to speak. In Acts xv. 2 he is 
similarly placed at the head of the deputation sent from 
Antioch about the question of circumcision. The 
account of the preceding missionary tour in Acts xiii., 
xiv., shows how the headship of the Gentile Church had 
come to devolve on Paul. In Luke’s narrative they 
are “ Barnabas and Saul” who set out; ‘ Paul and 
Barnabas” who return.* Under the trials and hazards 
of this adventure—at Paphos, Pisidian Antioch, Lystra 
—Paul’s native ascendancy and his higher vocation 
irresistibly declared themselves. Age and rank yielded 
to the fire of inspiration, to the gifts of speech, the 
splendid powers of leadership which the difficulties of 
this expedition revealed in Paul. Barnabas returned 
to Antioch with the thought in his heart, “‘He must 
increase; I must decrease.” And Barnabas was too 
generous a man not to yield cheerfully to his companion 
the precedence for which God thus marked him out. 
Yet the “sharp contention” in which the two men 
parted soon after this time (Acts xv. 36—40), was, we 
may conjecture, due in some degree to a lingering sore- 
ness in the mind of Barnabas on this account. 

The Apostle expresses himself with modesty, but 
in such a way as to show that /e was regarded in this 
juncture as the champion of the Gentile cause. The 
“revelation” that prompted the visit came to him. 
The “taking up of Titus” was his distinct act (ver. 1). 
Unless Paul has deceived himself, he was quite the 
leading figure in the Council; it was his doctrine and 
his Apostleship that exercised the minds of the chiefs 





* Acts xiii. 2, 7, 13, 43, 45, 46, 50; xiv. 12, 145 Xv. 2, 12 


ii. 1-5.| PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. toi 


at Jerusalem, when the delegates from Antioch appeared 
before them. Whatever Peter and James may have 
known or surmised previously concerning Paul’s voca- 
tion, it was only now that it became a public question 
for the Church. But as matters stood, it was a vital 
question. The status of uncircumcised Christians, and 
the Apostolic rank of Paul, constituted the twofold 
problem placed before the chiefs of the Jewish Church. 
At the same time, the Apostle, while fixing our attention 
mainly on his own position, gives to Barnabas his 
meed of honour; for he says, “I went up with Barnabas,” 
— we never yielded for an hour to the false brethren,” 
—“the Pillars gave fo me and Barnabas the right hand 
of fellowship, that we might go to the Gentiles.” But 
it is evident that the elder Gentile missionary stood 
in the background. By the action that he takes Paul 
unmistakably declares, ‘‘I -am the Apostle of the 
Gentiles ;”* and that claim is admitted by the con- 
senting voice of both branches of the Church. The 
Apostle stepped to the front at this solemn crisis, nct 
for his own rank or office’ sake, but at the call of God, 
in defence of the truth of the gospel and the spiritual 
freedom of mankind. 

This meeting at Jerusalem took place in 51, or it 
may be, 52 a.p. We make no doubt that it is the 
same with the Council of Acts xv. The identification 
has been controverted by several able scholars, but 
without success. The two accounts are different, bu‘ 
in no sense contradictory. In fact, as Dr. Pfleiderer 
acknowledges,f they “ admirably supplement each 
other. The agreement as to the chief points is in 


* Comp. Rom. xi. 13 ; xv. 16, 17. 
} Aibéert Lectures, p. 103. This testimony is the more valuable as 
coming from the ablest living exponent of the Baurian theory, 


102 THE EPISTLE TO SHE GALATIANS. 





any case greater than the discrepancies in the details; 
and these discrepancies can for the most part be 
explained by the different standpoint of the relaters.” 
A difficulty lies, however, in the fact that the historian 
of the Acts makes this the ¢hird visit of Paul to Jerusalem 
subsequently to his conversion; whereas, from the 
Apostle’s statement, it appears to have been the second. 
This discrepancy has already come up for discussion 
in the last Chapter (p. 92). Two further observations 
may be added on this point. In the first place, Paul 
does not say that he had never been to Jerusalem 
since the visit of ch. i. 18; he does say, that on this 
occasion he “went up again,” and that meanwhile 
he ‘remained unknown by face” to the Christians of 
Judzea (ch. i. 22)—a fact quite compatible, as we have 
shown, with what is related in Acts xi, 29, 30. And 
further, the request addressed at this conference to the 
Gentile missionaries, that they should “ remember the 
poor,” and the reference made by the Apostle to his 
previous zeal in the same business (vv. 9, IO), are in 
agreement with the earlier visit of charity mentioned - 
by Luke. 

I. The emphasis of ver. I rests upon its last clause, 
—taking along with me also Titus. Not “Titus as well 
as Barnabas”—this cannot be the meaning of the 
“also”—for Barnabas was Paul’s colleague, deputed 
equally with himself by the Church of Antioch; nor 
“Titus as well as others "—there were other members 
of the deputation (Acts xv. 2), but Paul makes no 
reference to them. The also (xai) calls attention to 
the fact of Paul’s taking 7i/ws, in view of the sequel ; 
as though he said, “I not only went up to Jerusalem 
at this particular time, under Divine direction, but I 
took along with me Titus besides.” The prefixed with 


ii1-5.] PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 103 


(cuv-) of the Greek participle refers to Paul himself: 
compare ver. 3, ‘‘ Titus who was with me.” As for the 
“certain others” referred to in Acts xv. 2, they were 
most likely Jews; or if any of them were Gentiles, 
still it was Titus whom Paul had chosen for his com- 
panion ; and his case stood out from the rest in such 
a way that it became the decisive one, the ¢est-case for 
the matter in dispute. 

The mention of 77s’ name in this connection was 
calculated to raise a lively interest in the minds of 
the Apostle’s readers. He is introduced as known to 
the Galatians; indeed by this time his name was 
familiar in the Pauline Churches, as that of a fellow- 
traveller and trusted helper of the Apostle. He was 
with Paul in the latter part of the third missionary 
tour—so we learn from the Corinthian letters—and 
therefore probably in the earlier part of the same 
journey, when the Apostle paid his second visit to 
Galatia. He belonged to the heathen mission, and 
was Paul’s “true child after a common faith” (Tit. i. 
4), an uncircumcised man, of Gentile birth equally with 
the Galatians. And now they read of his “going up 
to Jerusalem with Paul,” to the mother-city of believers, 
where are the pillars of the Church—the Jewish teachers 
would say—the true Apostles of Jesus, where His 
doctrine is preached in its purity, and where every 
Christian is circumcised and keeps the Law. Titus, 
the unclean Gentile, at Jerusalem! How could he be 
admitted or tolerated there, in the fellowship of the first 
disciples of the Lord? ‘This question Paul’s readers, 
after what they had heard from the Circumcisionists, 
would be sure to ask. He will answer it directly. 

But the Apostle goes on to say, that he “ went up 
in accordance with a revelation,” For this was one 


104 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





of those supreme moments in his life when he looked 
for and received the direct guidance of heaven. It was 
a most critical step to carry this question of Gentile 
circumcision up to Jerusalem, and to take Titus with 
him there, into the enemies’ stronghold. Moreover, 
on the settlement of this matter Paul knew that his 
Apostolic status depended, so far as human recognition 
was concerned. It would be seen whether the Jewish 
Church would acknowledge the converts of the Gentile 
mission as brethren in Christ; and whether the first 
Apostles would receive him, “the untimely one,” as a 
colleague of their own. Never had he more urgently 
needed or more implicitly relied upon Divine direction 
than at this hour. 

“And I put before them (the Church at Jerusalem) 
the gospel which I preach among the Gentiles—but 
privately to those of repute: am I running (said I), 
or have [ run, in vain?” The latter clause we read 
interrogatively, along with such excellent grammatical 
interpreters as Meyer, Wieseler, and Hofmann. Paul 
had not come to Jerusalem in order to solve any doubt 
in his own mind; but he wished the Church of 
Jerusalem ¢o declare its mind respecting the character 
of his ministry. He was not “running as uncertainly ;” 
nor in view of the “revelation” just given him could 
he have any fear for the result of his appeal. But 
it was in every way necessary that the appeal should 
be made. 

The interjected words, “‘ but privately,” etc., indicate 
that there were ¢wo meetings during the conference, 
such as those which seem to be distinguished in Acts 
xv. 4 and 6; and that the Apostle’s statement and the 
question arising out of it were addressed more pointedly 
to “those of repute.” By this term we understand, 


"7 


i.t-5.) PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 105 


here and in ver. 6, “ the apostles and elders” (Acts xv.), 
headed by Peter and James, amongst whom ‘‘those 
reputed to be pillars” are distinguished in ver.9. Paul 
dwells upon the phrase oi doxodvtes, because, to be 
sure, it was so often on the lips of the Judaizers, who 
were in the habit of speaking with an imposing air, 
and by way of contrast with Paul, of ‘“‘the authorities” 
(at Jerusalem)—as the designation might appropriately 
be rendered. These very men whom the Legalists 
were exalting at Paul’s expense, the venerated chiefs 
of the mother Church, had on this occasion, Paul is 
going to say, given their approval to his doctrine ; they 
declined to impose circumcision on Gentile believers. 
The Twelve were not stationary at Jerusalem, and 
therefore could not form a fixed court of reference 
there; hence a greater importance accrued to the 
Elders of the city Church, with the revered James at 
their head, the brother of the Lord. 

The Apostle, in bringing Titus, had brought up the 
subject-matter of the controversy. The “ gospel of the 
uncircumcision”’ stood before the Jewish authorities, 
an accomplished fact. Titus was there, by the side 
of Paul, a sample—and a noble specimen, we can well 
believe—of the Gentile Christendom which the Jewish 
Church must either acknowledge or repudiate. How 
will they treat him? Will they admit this foreign 
protégé of Paul to their communion? Or will they 
require him first to be circumcised? The question 
at issue could not take a form more crucial for the 
prejudices of the mother Church. It was one thing 
to acknowledge uncircumcised fellow-believers in the 
abstract, away yonder at Antioch or Iconium, or even 
at Czesarea; and another thing to see Titus standing 
amongst them in his heathen uncleanness, on the 


106 THE EPISTLE 10 THE CGALATIANS. 








sacred soil of Jerusalem, under the shadow of the 
Temple, and to hear Paul claiming for him—for this 
“dog” of a Gentile—equally with himself the rights 
of Christian brotherhood! The demand was most 
offensive to the pride of Judaism, as no one knew 
better than Paul; and we cannot wonder that a 
revelation was required to justify the Apostle in making 
it. The case of Zrophimus, whose presence with the 
Apostle at Jerusalem many years afterwards proved 
so nearly fatal (Acts xxi. 27—30), shows how 
exasperating to the legalist party his action in this 
instance must have been. Had not Peter and the 
better spirits of the Church in Jerusalem laid to 
heart the lesson of the vision of Joppa, that “no man 
must be called common cr unclean,” and had not 
the wisdom of the Holy Spirit eminently guided this 
first Council of the Church,* Paul’s challenge would 
have received a negative answer; and Jewish and 
Gentile Christianity must have been driven asunder. 
The answer, the triumphant answer, to Paul’s appeal 
comes in the next verse: “ Nay, not event Titus who 
was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be 
circumcised.” Titus was not circumcised, in point of 
fact—how can we doubt this in view of the language 
of ver. 5: ‘‘Not even for an hour did we yield in 
subjection?” And he “was not compelled to be cir- 
cumcised "—a mode of putting the denial which implies 
that in refusing his circumcision urgent solicitation had 





* Acts xv. 28: ‘It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.” 
This was in the Early Church no mere pious official form. 

+ For this use of a\X’ od5é compare Acts xix. 2 (here also after a ques- 
tion) ; I Cor. iii.2; iv. 3. We observe a similar instance of the phrase in 
ZEschylus, Perse, 1.792. *AXN opposes itself to the expectation of the 
Judaistic ‘‘ compellers,”’ present to the mind of Paul and his readers. 


v.t-§) PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 107 





to be withstood, solicitation addressed to Titus him- 
self, as well as to the leaders of his party. The kind 
of pressure brought to bear in the case and the 
quarter from which it proceeded, the Galatians would 
understand from their own oo (che wie 127, 
comp. ii. 14). 

The attempt made to bring about Titus’ circumcision 
signally failed. Its failure was the practical reply to 
the question which Paul tells us (ver. 2) he had put 
to the authorities in Jerusalem; or, according to the 

more common rendering of ver. 2, it was the answer to 
the apprehension under which he addressed himself to 
them.- On the former of these views of the connection, 
which we decidedly prefer, the authorities are clear of 
any share in the “compulsion” of Titus. When the 
Apostle gives the statement that his Gentile companion 
“was not compelled to be circumcised” as the reply to 
his appeal to “those of repute,” it is as much as to say: 
“ The chiefs at Jerusalem did not require Titus’ circum- 
cision. They repudiated the attempt of certain parties 
to force this rite upon him.” This testimony precisely 
accords with the terms of the rescript of the Council, 
and with the speeches of Peter and James, given in 
Acts xv. But it was a great point gained to have the 
liberality of the Jewish Christian leaders put to the 
proof in this way, to have the generous sentiments 
of speech and letter made good in this example of 
uncircumcised Christianity brought to their doors. 

To the authorities at Jerusalem the question put by 
the delegates from Antioch on the one side, and by the 
Circumcisionists on the other, was perfectly clear. If 
they insist on Titus’ circumcision, they disown Paul 
and the Gentile mission: if they accept Paul’s gospel, 
they must leave Titus alone. Paul and Barnabas 


‘=p eee 
a 


108 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

stated the case in a manner that left no room for 
doubt or compromise. Their action was marked, as 
ver. 5 declares, with the utmost decision. And the 
response of the Jewish leaders was equally frank and 
definite. We have no business, says James (Acts xv. 
19), ‘‘to trouble those from the Gentiles that turn to 
God.” Their judgement is virtually affirmed in ver. 3, 
in reference to Titus, in whose person the Galatians 
could not fail to see that their own case had been 
settled by anticipation. ‘Those of repute” disowned 
the Circumcisionists; the demand that the yoke of 
circumcision should be imposed on the Gentiles had 
no sanction from them. If the Judaizers claimed their 
sanction, the claim was false. 

Here the Apostle pauses, as his Gentile readers 
must have paused and drawn a long breath of relief 
or of astonishment at what he has just alleged. If 
Titus was not compelled to be circumcised, even at 
Jerusalem, who, they might ask, was going to compel 
them ?—The full stop should therefore be placed at 
the end of ver. 3, not ver. 2. Vv. 1—3 form a 
paragraph complete in itself. Its last sentence resolves 
the decisive question raised in this visit of Paul’s to 
Jerusalem, when he “ took with him also Titus.” 

II. The opening words of ver. 4 have all the appear- 
ance of commencing a new sentence. This sentence, con- 
cluded in ver. 5, is grammatically incomplete; but that 
is noreason for throwing it upon the previous sentence, 
to the confusion of both. There is a transition of thought, 
marked by the introductory Buwt,* from the issue of 
Paul’s second critical visit to Jerusalem (vv. I—3) to 


* This particle is a serious obstacle in the way of the ordinary 
punctuation, which attaches the following clause to ver. 3. The 6é is 
similar to that of ver. 6 (dd 6 7. Soxodvrwy) ; not of kav (diay 5é in ver. 


u.I-5.) 2AUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 16g 
the cause which made it necessary. This was the action 
of “false brethren,” to whom the Apostle made a 
determined and successful resistance (vv. 4, 5). The 
opening “ But” does not refer to ver. 3 in particular, 
rather to the entire foregoing paragraph. The ellipsis 
(after “ But”) is suitably supplied in the marginal render- 
ing of the Revisers, where we take z¢ was to mean, not 
“ Because of the false brethren Tztus was not (or was 
not compelled to be) circumcised,” but “ Because of the 
false brethren this meeting came about, or, I took the 
course aforesaid.” 

To know what Paul means by “false brethren,” we 
must turn to ch. i. 6—9, iii. I, iv. 17, v. 7—12, vi. 12—14, 
in this Epistle; and again to 2 Cor. ii. 17—iii. 1, iv. 2, 
min 3,4, 12—22, 26; Rom, xvi. 17, 18; Phil. ti. 2. 
They were men bearing the name of Christ and pro- 
fessing faith in Him, but Pharisees at heart, self-seeking, 
rancorous, unscrupulous men, bent on exploiting the 
Pauline Churches for their own advantage, and regard- 
ing Gentile converts to Christ as so many possible 
recruits for the ranks of the Circumcision. 

But where, and how, were these traitors “ privily 
brought in?” Brought in, we answer, to the field of 
the Gentile mission; and doubtless by local Jewish 
sympathisers, who introduced them without the con- 
currence of the officers of the Church. They “came in 
privily ’—slipped in by stealth—“ to spy out our liberty 
which we have in Christ Jesus.” Now it was at Antioch 
and in the pagan Churches that this liberty existed in 





2, nor of @avaroy 6 cravpou (Phil. ii. 8), which are parenthetical qualifica- 
tions. And to say, ‘ Because of the false brethren Titus was not com- 
pelled to be circumcised,” is simply an inconsequence. Would he have 
been compelled to be circumcised if they had vot required it? This 
is the assumption implied by the above construction. 


110 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





its normal exercise—the liberty for which our Epistle 
contends, the enjoyment of Christian privileges inde- 
pendently of Jewish law—in which Paul and his 
brother missionaries had identified themselves with 
their Gentile followers. The “false brethren” were 
Jewish spies in the Gentile Christian camp. We donot 
see how the Galatians could have read the Apostle’s 
words otherwise; nor how it could have occurred to 
them that he was referring to the way in which these 
men had been originally “ brought into” the Jewish 
Church. That concerned neither him nor them. But 
their getting into the Gentile fold was the serious thing. 
They are the “certain who came down from Judza, 
and taught the (Gentile) brethren, saying, Except ye be 
circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be 
saved ;” and whom their own Church afterwards re- 
pudiated (Acts xv. 24). With Antioch for the centre of 
their operations, these mischief-makers disturbed the 
whole field of Paul and Barnabas’ labours in Syria 
and Cilicia (Acts xv. 23; comp. Gal. i. 21). For the 
Galatian readers, the terms of this sentence, coming 
after the anathema of ch. i. 6—9, threw a startling 
light on the character of the Judean emissaries busy in 
their midst. This description of the former ‘‘troublers ” 
strikes at the Judaic opposition in Galatia. It is as if 
the Apostle said: “These false brethren, smuggled in 
amongst us, to filch away our liberties in Christ, wolves 
in sheep’s clothing—I know them well; I have en- 
countered them before this. 1 never yielded to their 
demands a single inch. I carried the struggle with 
them to Jerusalem. There, in the citadel of Judaism, 
and before the assembled chiefs of the Judean Church, 
I vindicated once and for all, under the person of Titus, 
your imperilled Christian rights.” 


i.1-5.] PAUL AND THE FALSE BRETHREN. 11s 


But as the Apostle dilates on the conduct of these 
Jewish intriguers, the precursors of such an army of 
troublers, his heart takes fire ; in the rush of his emo- 
tion he is carried away from the original purport of his 
sentence, and breaks it off with a burst of indignation : 
“To whom,” he cries, ‘‘ not even for an hour did we yield 
by subjection, that the truth of the gospel might abide 
with you.” A breakdown like this—an anacoluthon, as 
the grammarians call it—is nothing strange in Paul’s 
style. Despite the shipwrecked grammar, the sense 
comes off safely enough. The clause, “we did not 
yield,” etc., describes in a negative form, and with 
heightened effect, the course the Apostle had pursued 
from the first in dealing with the false brethren. In 
this unyielding spirit he had acted, without a moment’s 
wavering, from the hour when, guided by the Holy 
Spirit, he set out for Jerusalem with the uncircumcised 
Titus by his side, until he heard his Gentile gospel 
vindicated by the lips of Peter and James, and received 
from them the clasp of fellowship as Christ’s acknow- 
ledged Apostle to the heathen. 

It was therefore the action of Jewish interlopers, 
men of the same stamp as those infesting the Galatian 
Churches, which occasioned Paul’s second, public visit 
to Jerusalem, and his consultation with the heads of the 
Judean Church. This decisive course he was himself 
inspired to take; while at the same time it was taken 
on behalf and under the direction of the Church of 
Antioch, the metropolis of Gentile Christianity. He 
had gone up with Barnabas and “certain others ”— 
including the Greek Titus chosen by himself—the 
company forming a representative deputation, of which 
Paul was the leader and spokesman. This measure was 
the boldest and the only effectual means of combatting 





112 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





the Judaistic propaganda. It drew from the authorities 
at Jerusalem the admission that “ Circumcision is no- 
thing,” and that Gentile Christians are free from the ritual 
law. This was a victory gained over Jewish prejudice 
of immense significance for the future of Christianity. 
The ground was already cut from under the feet of the 
Judaic teachers in Galatia, and of all who should at any 
time seek to impose external rites as things essential to 
salvation in Christ. To all his readers Paul can now 
say, so far as his part is concerned: The truth of the 
gospel abides with you, 


CHAPTER VIII. 
PAUL AND THE THREE PILIARS, 


*¢ But from those who were reputed to be somewhat (what they once 
were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth not man’s person)— 
they, I say, who were of repute imparted nothing to me: but contrari- 
wise, when they saw that I had been intrusted with the gospel of the 
uncircumcision, even as Peter with ¢he gosfel of the circumcision {for 
he that wrought for Peter unto the apostleship of the circumcision 
wrought for me also unto the Gentiles) ; and when they perceived the 
grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who 
were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of 
fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the 
circumcision ; only they would that we should remember the poor; 
which very thing I was also zealous to do.”—GAL. ii. 6—I0, 


E have dealt by anticipation, in Chapter VI., with 

several of the topics raised in this section of 
the Epistle—touching particularly the import of the 
phrase “those of repute,” and the tone of disparage- 
ment in which these dignitaries appear to be spoken of 
in ver. 6. But there still remains in these verses 
matter in its weight and difficulty more than sufficient 
to occupy another Chapter. 

The grammatical connection of the first paragraph, 
like that of vv. 2, 3, is involved and disputable. We 
construe its clauses in the following way :—(1) Ver. 6 
begins with a Sut, contrasting “those of repute” with 
the “false brethren” dealt with in the last sentence. 
It contains another anacoluthon (or incoherence of lan- 


8 


iinet) inl. 7 


guage), due to the surge of feeling remarked in ver. 4, — 
which still disturbs the Apostle’s grammar. He begins: | 
“ But from those reputed to be something "—as though 
he intended to say, “I received on my part nothing, no 
addition or qualification to my gospel.” But he has 
no sooner mentioned “those of repute” than he is re- 
minded of the studied attempt that was made to set up 
their authority in opposition to his own, and accordingly 
throws in this protest: “what they were aforetime,* 
makes no difference to me: man’s person God doth 
not accept.” But in saying this, Paul has laid down 
one of his favourite axioms, a principle that filled a 
large place in his thoughts;f and its enunciation 
deflects the course of the main sentence, so that it is 
resumed in an altered form: “For to me those of 
repute imparted nothing.” Here the me receives a 
greater emphasis ; and for takes the place of but. The 
fact that the first Apostles had nothing to impart to 
Paul, signally illustrates the Divine impartiality, which 
often makes the last and least in human eyes equal to 
the first. 

(2) Vv. 7—9 state the positive, as ver. 6 the negative 
side of the relation between Paul and the elder Apostles, 
still keeping in view the principle laid down in the 
former verse. ‘‘ Nay, on the contrary, when they saw 
that I have in charge the gospel of the uncircumcision, 
as Peter that of the circumcision (ver. 7)—and when 
they perceived the grace that had been given me, James 
and Cephas and John, those renowned pillars of the 
Church, gave the right hand of fellowship to myself and 


114 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


* For this rendering of zoré comp. ch. i. 13, 23; and see Lightfoot, 
or Beet, zv /oc. 

t Comp. Rom, ii, 113 t Cor. i, 27—31; xv. 9, 10; Eph, vi, 9; 
Col, tii. 25, 


ii.6-10] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. 115 


Barnabas, agreeing that we should go to the Gentiles, 
while they laboured amongst the Jews” (ver. 9). 

(3) Ver. 8 comes in as a parenthesis, explaining how 
the authorities at Jerusalem came to see that this trust 
belonged to Paul. “ For,” he says, “ He that in Peter’s 
case displayed His power in making him (above all 
others) Apostle of the Circumcision, did as much for 
me in regard to the Gentiles.” It is not human ordina- 
tion, but Divine inspiration that makes a minister of 
Jesus Christ. The noble Apostles of Jesus had the 
wisdom to see this. It had pleased God to bestow this 
grace on their old Tarsian persecutor ; and they frankly 
acknowledged the fact. 

Thus Paul sets forth, in the first place, the completeness 
of his Apostolic qualifications, put to proof at the crisis of 
the circumcision controversy ; and in the second place, 
the judgement formed respecting him and hts ofjice by the 
first Apostles and companions of the Lord. 

I. “To me those of repute added nothing.” Paul 
had spent but a fortnight in the Christian circle of 
Jerusalem, fourteen years ago. Of its chiefs he had 
met at that time only Peter and James, and them in the 
capacity of a visitor, not as a disciple or a candidate for 
office. He had never sought the opportunity, nor felt 
the need, of receiving instruction from the elder Apostles 
during all the years in which he had preached Christ 
amongst the heathen. It was not likely he would do 
so now. When he came into conference and debate 
with them at the Council, he showed himself their equal, 
neither in knowledge nor authority ‘‘a whit behind the 
very chiefest.” And they were conscious of the same fact. 

On the essentials of the gospel Paul found himself 
in agreement with the Twelve. This is implied in the 
language of ver. 6. When one writes, “ A adds nothing 


to B,” one assumes that B has already what belongs to 
A, and not something different. Paul asserts in the 
most positive terms he can command, that his inter- 
course with the holders of the primitive Christian 
tradition left him as a minister of Christ exactly where 
he was before. ‘On me,” he says, “ they conferred 
nothing ”—rather, perhaps, “ addressed no communication 
to me.” The word used appears to deny their having 
made any motion of the kind. The Greek verb is the 
same that was employed in ch. i. 16, a rare and 
delicate compound.* Its meaning varies, like that of 
our confer, communicate, as it is applied in a more or 
less active sense. In the former place Paul had said 
that he “did not confer with flesh and blood”; now 
he adds, that flesh and blood did not confer any- 
thing upon him. Formerly he did not bring his com- 
mission to lay it before men; now they had nothing 
to bring on their part to lay before him. The same 
word affirms the Apostle’s independence at both epochs, 
shown in the first instance by his reserve toward the 
dignitaries at Jerusalem, and in the second by their 
reserve toward him. Conscious of his Divine call, he 
sought no patronage from the elder Apostles then ; and 
they, recognising that call, offered him no such patronage 
now. Paul's gospel for the Gentiles was complete, and 
sufficient unto itself. His ministry showed no defect in 
quality or competence. There was nothing about it 
that laid it open to correction, even on the part of those 
wisest and highest in dignity amongst the personal 
followers of Jesus. 


116 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





* We cannot explain rpocavéfevro here by the dvePéuny of ver. 2, 
as though Paul wished to say, ‘‘I imparted to them my gospel ; they 
imparted to me nothing further.” For mpos- implies dérection, rather 
than addition. See Meyer on this verb in ch. i. 16, 


ii. 6-10.] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. 117 


So Paul declares; and we can readily believe him. 
Nay, we are tempted to think that it was rather the 
Pillars who might need to learn from him, than he 
from them. In doctrine, Paul holds the primacy in the 
band of the Apostles. While all were inspired by the 
Spirit of Christ, the Gentile Apostle was in many ways 
a more richly furnished man than any of the rest. The 
Paulinism of Peter’s First Epistle goes to show that the 
debt was on the other side. Their earlier privileges 
and priceless store of recollections of “all that Jesus 
did and taught,” were matched on Paul’s side by a 
penetrating logic, a breadth and force of intellect applied 
to the facts of revelation, and a burning intensity of 
spirit, which in their combination were unique. The 
Pauline teaching, as it appears in the New Testament, 
bears in the highest degree the marks of original genius, 
the stamp of a mind whose inspiration is its own. 

Modern criticism even exaggerates Paul’s originality. 
It leaves the other Apostles little more than a negative 
part to play in the development of Christian truth. In 
some of its representations, the figure of Paul appears 
to overshadow even that of the Divine Master. It 
was Paul’s creative genius, it is said, his daring idealism, 
that deified the human Jesus, and transformed the 
scandal of the cross into the glory of an atonement 
reconciling the world to God. Such theories Paul 
himself would have regarded with horror. ‘I received 
of the Lord that which I delivered unto you:” such 
is his uniform testimony. If he owed so little as a 
minister of Christ to his brother Apostles, he felt with 
the most sincere humility that he owed everything to 
Christ. The agreement of Paul’s teaching with that of 
the other New Testament writers, and especially with 
that of Jesus in the Gospels, proves that, however 


biti 


118 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


distinct and individual his conception of the common 
gospel, none the less there was a common gospel of 
Christ, and he did not speak of his own mind. The 
attempts made to get rid of this agreement by post- 
dating the New Testament documents, and by explain- 
ing away the larger utterances of Jesus found in the 
Gospels as due to Paulinist interpolation, are unavail- 
ing. They postulate a craftiness of ingenuity on the 
part of the writers of the incriminated books, and an 
ignorance in those who first received them, alike in- 
conceivable. Paul did not build up the splendid and 
imperishable fabric of his theology on some speculation 
of his own. Its foundation lies in the person and the 
teaching of Jesus Christ, and was common to Paul with 
James and Cephas and John. ‘“ Whether I or they,” 
he testifies, ““so we preach, and so ye believed” 
(1 Cor. xv. 11). Paul satisfied himself at this con- 
ference that he and the Twelve taught the same gospel. 
Not in its primary data, but in their logical develop- 
ment and application, lies the specifically Pauline in 
Paulinism. The harmony between Paul and the other 
Apostolic leaders has the peculiar value which belongs 
to the agreement of minds of different orders, working 
independently. 

The Judaizers, however, persistently asserted Paul’s 
dependence on the elder Apostles. “ The authority of 
the Primitive Church, the Apostolic tradition of Jeru- 
salem ’’—this was the fulcrum of their argument. Where 
could Paul, they asked, have derived his knowledge of 
Christ, but from this fountain-head? And the power 
that made him, could unmake him. Those who com- 
missioned him had the right to overrule him, or even 
to revoke his commission. Was it not known that he 
had from time to time resorted to Jerusalem; that he 


fi 


ii-6-10.] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. IIg 


had once publicly submitted his teaching to the 
examination of the heads of the Church there? The 
words of ver. 6 contradict these malicious insinuations. 
Hence the positiveness of the Apostle’s self-assertion. 
In the Corinthian Epistles his claim to independence is 
made in gentler style, and with expressions of humility 
that might have been misunderstood here. But the 
position Paul takes up is the same in either case: “I 
am an Apostle. I have seen Jesus our Lord. You— 
Corinthians, Galatians—are my work in the Lord.” 
That Peter and the rest were in the old days so near 
to the Master, “makes no difference” to Paul. They 
are what they are—their high standing is universally 
acknowledged, and Paul has no need or wish to ques- 
tion it ; but, by the grace of God, he also is what he is 
(1 Cor. xv. 10). Their Apostleship does not exclude 
or derogate from his. 

The self-depreciation, the keen sense of inferiority 
in outward respects, so evident in Paul's allusions to 
this subject elsewhere, is after all not wanting here. 
For when he says, “God regards not man's person,” it 
is evident that in respect of visible qualifications Paul 
felt that he had few pretensions to make. Appear- 
ances were against him. And those who “glory in 
appearance ” were against him too (2 Cor. v. 12). Such 
men could not appreciate the might of the Spirit that 
wrought in Paul, nor the sovereignty of Divine election. 
They “reckoned ” of the Apostle “as though he walked 
according to flesh” (2 Cor. x. 2). It seemed to them 
obvious, as a matter of course, that he was far below 
the Twelve. With men of worldly wisdom the Apostle 
did not expect that his arguments would prevail. His 
appeal was to “ the spiritual, who judge all things.” 

So we come back to the declaration of the Apostle 





120 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. » 





in ch. i. 11: “I give you to know, brethren, that my 
gospel is not according to man.” Man had no hand 
either in laying its foundation or putting on the head- 
stone. Paul’s predecessors in Apostolic office did not 
impart the gospel to him at the outset; nor at a later 
time had they attempted to make any addition to the 
doctrine he had taught far and wide amongst the 
heathen. His Apostleship was from first to last a 
supernatural gift of grace. 

II. Instead, therefore, of assuming to be his 
superiors, or offering to bestow something of their own 
on Paul, the three renowned pillars of the faith at Jeru- 
salem acknowledged him as a brother Apostle. 

“ They saw that I am intrusted with the gospel of the 
uncircumcision.” The form of the verb implies a trust 
given in the past and taking effect in the present, a 
settled fact. Once for all, this charge had devolved 
on Paul. He is “appointed herald and apostle” of 
“Christ Jesus, who gave Himself a ransom for all,— 
teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth” (1 Tim. ii. 
6, 7). That office Paul still holds. He is the leader 
of Christian evangelism. Every new movement in 
heathen missionary enterprise looks to his teaching 
for guidance and inspiration. 

The conference at Jerusalem in itself furnished 
conclusive evidence of Paul’s Apostolic commission. 
The circumcision controversy was a test not only for 
Gentile Christianity, but at the same time for its 
Apostle and champion. Paul brought to this discus- 
sion a knowledge and insight, a force of character, a 
conscious authority and unction of the Holy Spirit, that 
powerfully impressed the three great men who listened 
to him. The triumvirate at Jerusalem well knew that 
Paul had not received his marvellous gifts through 


ii.6-10.] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. et 


their hands. Nor was there anything lacking to him 
which they felt themselves called upon to supply. 
They could only say, “This is the Lord's doing; and 
it is marvellous in our eyes.” Knowing, as Peter at 
least, we presume, had done for many years,* the 
history of Paul’s conversion, and seeing as they now 
did the conspicuous Apostolic signs attending his 
ministry, James and Cephas and John could only come 
to one conclusion. The gospel of the uncircumcision, 
they were convinced, was committed to Paul, and his 
place in the Church was side by side with Peter. 
Peter must have felt as once before on a like occasion: 
“Tf God gave unto him a gift equal to that He gave to 
me, who am I, that I should be able to hinder God?” 
(Acts xi. 17). It was not for them because of their 
elder rank and dignity to debate with God in this 
matter, and to withhold their recognition from His 
“chosen vessel.” 

John had not forgotten his Master’s reproof for 
banning the man that “ followeth not with us” (Luke 
ix. 49; Mark ix. 38). They “recognised,” Paul says, 
“the grace that had been given me;” and by that he 
means, to be sure, the undeserved favour that raised 
him to his Apostolic office.t This recognition was 
given to Paul. Barnabas shared the “fellowship.” His 
hand was clasped by the three chiefs at Jerusalem, not 
less warmly than that of his younger comrade. But 
itis in the singular number that Paul speaks of “ the 
grace that was given me,” and of the “trust in the 
gospel” and the “ working of God unto Apostleship.” 

Why then does not Paul say outright, “ they acknow- 
ledged me an Apostle, the equal of Peter?” Some are 


* Ch. i. 18. See Chapter V., p. 87. 
J See Rom. i. 5; 1 Cor. xv. 10; Eph. iii. 2, 7, 8; 1 Tim. i. 13. 





122 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








bold enough to say—AHolsten in particular—“ Because 
this is just what the Jerusalem chiefs never did, and 
never could have done.”* We will only reply, that if 
this were the case, the passage is a continued suggestio 
falst. No one could write the words of vv. 7—9, with- 
out intending his readers to believe that such a recogni- 
tion took place.. Paul avoids the point-blank assertion, 
with a delicacy that any man of tolerable modesty will 
understand. Even the appearance of “glorying” was 
hateful to him (2 Cor. x. 17; xi. 1; xii. I—5, 11). 
The Church at Jerusalem, as we gather from vv. 
7, 8, observed in Paul “signs of the Apostle” 
resembling those borne by Peter. His Gentile com- 
mission ran parallel with Peter’s Jewish commission. 
The labours of the two men were followed by the same 
kind of success, and marked by similar displays of 
miraculous power. The like seal of God was stamped 
on both. This correspondence runs through the Acts 
of the Apostles. Compare, for example, Paul’s sermon 
at Antioch in Pisidia with that of Peter on the Day of 
Pentecost ; the healing of the Lystran cripple and the 
punishment of Elymas, with the case of the lame man 
at the Temple gate and the encounter of Peter and 
Simon Magus. The conjunction of the names of Peter 
and Paul was familiar to the Apostolic Church. The 
parallelism between the course of these great Apostles 
was no invention of second-century orthodoxy, set up 
in the interests of a “reconciling hypothesis;” it 
attracted public attention as early as 51 a.D., while 
they were still in their mid career. If this idea so 
strongly possessed the minds of the Jewish Christian 
leaders and influenced their action at the Council of 


* Zum Evangelien d. Paulus und d. Petrus, p. 273. Holsten is the 
keenest and most logical of all the Baurian succession 


ii. 6-10.] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. 123 








Jerusalem, we need not be surprised that it should 
dominate Luke’s narrative to the extent that it does. 
The allusions to Peter in I Corinthians* afford further 
proof that in the lifetime of the two Apostles it was a 
common thing to link their names together. 

But had not Peter also a share in the Gentile 
mission? Does not the division of labour made at 
this conference appear to shut out the senior Apostle 
from a field to which he had the prior claim? ‘Ye 
know,” said Peter at the Council, “how that a good 
while ago God made choice among you, that by my 
mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel, 
and believe” (Acts xv. 7). To Peter was assigned the 
double honour of “ opening the door of faith” both to 
Jew and Gentile. This experience made him the readier 
to understand Paul’s position, and gave him the greater 
weight in the settlement of the question at issue. And 
not Peter alone, but Philip the evangelist and other 
Jewish Christians had carried the gospel across the 
line of Judaic prejudice, before Paul appeared on the 
scene. Barnabas and Silas were both emissaries of 
Jerusalem. So that the mother Church, if she could 
not claim Paul as her son, had nevertheless a large 
stake in the heathen mission. But when Paul came to 
the front, when his miraculous call, his incomparable 
gifts and wonderful success had made themselves 
known, it was evident to every discerning mind that he 
was the man chosen by God to direct this great work. 
Peter had opened the door of faith to the heathen, and 
had bravely kept it open; but it was for Paul to lead 
the Gentile nations through the open door, and to make 
a home for them within the fold of Christ. The men 





My Chetek 2s itie 22x. 6, 





124 7ZE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS 





who had laboured in this field hitherto were Paul's fore- 
runners. And Peter does not hesitate to acknowledge 
the vounger Apostle’s special fitness for this wider 
province of their common work; and with the con- 
currence of James and John he yields the charge of it 
ty him. 

Let us observe that it is two different provinces, not 
different gospels, that are in view. When the Apostle 
speaks of ‘‘the gospel of the uncircumcision” as com- 
mitted to himself, and that “of the circumcision” to 
Peter, he never dreams ‘of any one supposing, aS some 
of his modern critics persist in doing, that he meant 
two different doctrines. How can that be possible, 
when he has declared those anathema who preach any 
other gospel? He has laid his gospel before the heads 
of the Jerusalem Church. Nothing has occurred there, 
nothing is hinted here, to suggest the existence of a 
“radical divergence.” If James and the body of the 
Judean Church really sympathised with the Circum- 
cisionists, with those whom the Apostle calls “ false 
brethren,” how could he with any sincerity have come 
to an agreement with them, knowing that this tremen- 
dous gulf was lying all the while between the Pillars 
and himself? Zeller argues that the transaction was 
simply a pledge of “reciprocal toleration, a merely 
external concordat between Paul and the original 
Apostles.” * The clasp of brotherly friendship was a 
sorry farce, if that were all it meant—if Paul and the 
Three just consented for the time to slur over irrecon- 
cilable differences ; while Paul in turn has glossed over 
the affair for us in these artful verses! Baur, with 
characteristic finesse, says on the same point: “The 





* The Acts of the Apostles critically investigated, vol. ii., pp. 28, 30: 
Eng. Trans. 


i610] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. 128 





Kowwvia was always a division; it could only be 
brought into effect by one party going eis ta éOvn, the 
other eis T2)v mepitopjy. As the Jewish Apostles could 
allege nothing against the principles on which Paul 
founded his evangelical mission, they were obliged to 
recognise them in a certain manner; but their recogni- 
tion was a mere outward one. They left him to work 
on these principles still further in the cause of the 
gospel among the Gentiles; but for themselves they 
did not desire to know anything more about them.” * 
So that, according to the Tiibingen critics, we witness in 
ver. 9 notaunion, but adivorce! The Jewish Apostles 
recognise Paul as a brother, only in order to get rid of 
him. Can misinterpretation be more unjust than this ? 
Paul does not say, “They gave us the right hand of 
fellowship ox condition that,” but, “7 order that we should 
go this way, they that.” As much as to say: The 
two parties came together and entered into a closer 
union, so that with the best mutual understanding each 
might go its own way and pursue its proper work in 
harmony with the other. For Paul it would have been 
a sacrilege to speak of the diplomatic compromise which 
Baur and Zeller describe as “ giving the right hand of 
fellowship.” 

Never did the Church more deeply realise than at 
her first Council the truth, that ‘there is one body 
and one Spirit ; one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one 
God and Father of all, who is above all, and through 
all, and in all” (Eph. iv. 4—6). Paul still seems to feel 
his hand in the warm grasp of Peter and of John when 
he writes to the Ephesians of “the foundation of the 
Apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus Himself for 


* Paulus, vol, i., p. 130: Eng. Trans, 





126 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





chief corner-stone ; in whom the whole building fitly 
framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the 
Lord” (ch. ii. 20, 21). Alas for the criticism that is 
obliged to see in words like these the invention of 
second-century churchmanship, putting into the mouth 
of Paul catholic sentiments of which in reality he knew 
nothing! Such writers know nothing of the power of 
that fellowship of the Spirit which reigned in the 
glorious company of the Apostles. 

“Only they would have us remember the poor”—a 
circumstance mentioned partly by way of reminder to 
the Galatians touching the collection for Jerusalem, 
which Paul had already set on foot amongst them 
(1 Cor. xvi. 1). The request was prompted by the 
affectionate confidence with which the Jewish chiefs 
embraced Paul and Barnabas. It awakened an eager 
response in the Apostle’s breast. His love to his 
Jewish kindred made him welcome the suggestion. 
Moreover every deed of charity rendered by the 
wealthier Gentile Churches to “the poor saints in 
Jerusalem,” was another tie helping to bind the two 
communities to each other. Of such liberality Antioch, 
under the direction of the Gentile missionaries, had 
already set the example (Acts xi. 29, 30). 


James, Peter, John, and Paul—it was a memorable 
day when these four men met face to face. What a 
mighty quaternion! Amongst them they have virtually 
made the New Testament and the Christian Church. 
They represent the four sides of the one foundation of 
the City of God. Of the Evangelists, Matthew holds 
affinity with James ; Mark with Peter ; and Luke with 
Paul. James clings to the past and embodies the 
transition from Mosaism to Christianity. Peter is the 


ii.6-10.] PAUL AND THE THREE PILLARS. 127 








man of the present, quick in thought and action, eager, 
buoyant, susceptible. Paul holds the future in his 
grasp, and schools the unborn nations. John gathers 
present, past, and future into one, lifting us into the 
region of eternal life and love. 

With Peter and James Paul had met before, and was 
to meet again. But so far as we can learn, this was 
the only occasion on which his path crossed that of 
John. Nor is this Apostle mentioned again in Paul's 
letters. In the Acts he appears but once or twice, 
standing silent in Peter’s shadow. A _ holy reserve 
surrounds John’s person in the earlier Apostolic history. 
His hour was not yet come. But his name ranked 
in public estimation amongst the three foremost 
of the Jewish Church ; and he exercised, doubtless, a 
powerful, though quiet, conciliatory influence in the 
settlement of the Gentile question. The personality of 
Paul excited, we may be sure, the profoundest interest 
in such a mind as that of John. He absorbed, and yet 
in a sense transcended, the Pauline theology. The 
Apocalypse, although the most Judaic book of the New 
Testament, is penetrated with the influence of Paulinism. 
The detection in it of a covert attack on the Gentile 
Apostle is simply one of the mare’s nests of a super- 
subtle and suspicious criticism. John was to be the 
heir of Paul’s labours at Ephesus and in Asia Minor. 
And John’s long life, touching the verge of the second 
century, his catholic position, his serene and lofty spirit, 
blending in itself and resolving into a higher unity the 
tendencies of James and Peter and Paul, give us the 
best assurance that in the Apostolic age there was 
indeed “One, holy, catholic, Apostolic Church.” 

Paul’s fellowship with Peter and with James was 
cordial and endeared. But to hold the hand of John, 


4 






128 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. — 


“the disciple whom Jesus loved,” was a yet higher satis- 
faction. That clasp symbolized a union between men 
most opposite in temperament and training, and brought 
to the knowledge of Christ in very different ways, but 
whose communion in Him was deep as the life eternal. 
Paul and John are the two master minds of the New 
Testament. Of all men that ever lived, these two best 
understood Jesus Christ. 


—=- 


CHAPTER IX. 
PAUL AND FETER AT ANTIOCH. 


“*But when Cephas came to Antioch, I resisted him to the face, 
because he stood condemned. For before that certain came from 
James, he did eat with the Gentiles; but when they came, he drew 
back and separated himself, fearing them that were of the circumcision. 
And the rest of the Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that 
even Barnabas was carried away with their dissimulation. But when 
I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the 
gospel, I said unto Cephas before them all, If thou, being a Jew, 
livest as do the Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, how compellest thou 
the Gentiles to live as do the Jews? We being Jews by nature, and 
not sinners of the Gentiles, yet knowing that a man is not justified 
by works of law, but only through faith in Jesus Christ, even we 
believed on Christ Jesus, that we might be justified by faith in Christ, 
and not by the works of the law: because by the works of the law 
shall no flesh be justified. But if, while we so7ht to be justified in 
Christ, we ourselves also were found sinners, is Christ a minister of 
sin? God forbid. For if I build up again those things which I 
destroyed, I prove myself a transgressor.”—GAL, ii. 11—18. 


HE conference at Jerusalem issued in the formal 

recognition by the Primitive Church of Gentile 
Christianity, and of Paul’s plenary Apostleship. And 
it brought Paul into brotherly relations with the 
three great leaders of Jewish Christianity. But this 
fellowship was not to continue undisturbed. The 
same cause was still at work which had compelled the 
Apostle to go up to Jerusalem, taking Titus with him. 


9 





130 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








The leaven of Pharisaic legalism remained in the 
Church. Indeed, as time went on and the national 
fanaticism grew more violent, this spirit of intolerance 
became increasingly bitter and active. The address 
of James to Paul on the occasion of his last visit to the 
Holy City, shows that the Church of Jerusalem was at 
this time in a state of the most sensitive jealousy in 
regard to the Law, and that the legalistic prejudices 
always existing in it had gained a strength with which 
it was difficult to cope (Acts xxi. 17—25). 

But for the present the judaizing faction had 
received a check. It does not appear that the party 
ever again insisted on circumcision as a thing essential 
to salvation for the Gentiles. The utterances of Peter 
and James at the Council, and the circular addressed 
therefrom to the Gentile Churches, rendered this 
impossible. The Legalists made a change of front; 
and adopted a subtler and seemingly more moderate 
policy. They now preached circumcision as the prero- 
gative of the Jew within the Church, and as a counsel 
of perfection for the Gentile believer in Christ (ch. iii. 3). 
To quote the rescript of Acts xv. against this altered 
form of the circumcisionist doctrine, would have been 
wide of the mark. 

It is against this newer type of Judaistic teaching 
that our Epistle is directed. Circumcision, its advocates 
argued, was a Divine ordinance that must have its 
benefit. God has given to Israel an <indefeasible 
pre-eminence in His kingdom.t Law-keeping children 
of Abraham enter the new Covenant on a higher 
footing than “ sinners of the Gentiles:” they are still 
the elect race, the holy nation. If the Gentiles wish 

* Rom. ii. 25—iii. 1. 
¢ Rom. i. 16; ii. 9, 10; ix. 4, 5; xi. 1, 2 


ii. 11-18.) PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 131 


to share with them, they must add to their faith 
circumcision, they must complete their imperfect 
righteousness by legal sanctity. So they might hope 
to enter on the full heritage of the sons of Abraham ; 
they would be brought into communion with the first 
Apostles and the Brother of the Lord; they would 
be admitted to the inner circle of the kingdom of 
God. The new Legalists sought, in fact, to super- 
impose Jewish on Gentile Christianity. They no 
longer refused all share in Christ to the uncircumcised ; 
they offered them a larger share. So we construe the 
teaching which Paul had to combat in the second 
stage of his conflict with Judaism, to which his 
four major Epistles belong. And the signal for this 
renewed struggle was given by the collision with Peter 
at Antioch. 

This encounter did not, we think, take place on the 
return of Paul and Barnabas from the Council. The 
compact of Jerusalem secured to the Church a few 
years of rest from the Judaistic agitation. The 
Thessalonian Epistles, written in 52 or 53 a.D., go to 
show, not only that the Churches of Macedonia were 
free from the legalist contention, but that it did not at 
this period occupy the Apostle’s mind. Judas Bar- 
sabbas and Silas—not Peter—accompanied the Gentile 
missionaries in returning to Antioch; and Luke 
gives, in Acts xv., a tolerably full account of the cir- 
cumstances which transpired there in the interval 
before the second missionary tour, without the slightest 
hint of any visit made at this time by the Apostle 
Peter. We can scarcely believe that the circum- 
cision party had already recovered, and increased its 
influence, to the degree that it must have done when 
“even Barnabas was carried away”; still less 





132 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


Jerusalem and of his fraternal communion there with 
Paul would show himself so far estranged. 

When, therefore, did ‘Cephas come down to 
Antioch?” The Galatians evidently knew. The 
Judaizers had given their account of the matter, to 
Paul’s disadvantage. Perhaps he had referred to it 
himself on his last visit to Galatia, when we know he 
spoke explicitly and strongly against the Cireum- 
cisionists (ch. i. 9). Just before his arrival in Galatia 
on this occasion he had “spent some time” at Antioch 
(Acts xviii. 22, 23), in the interval between the second 
and third missionary journeys. Luke simply mentions 
the fact, without giving any details. This is the like- 
liest opportunity for the meeting of the two Apostles 
in the Gentile capital. M. Sabatier,* in the following 
sentences, appears to us to put the course of events in its 
true light :—‘‘ Evidently the Apostle had quitted Jeru- 
salem and undertaken his second missionary journey full 
of satisfaction at the victory he had gained, and free from 
anxiety for the future. The decisive moment of the 
crisis therefore necessarily falls between the Thes- 
salonian and Galatian Epistles. What had happened 
in the meantime? The violent discussion with Peter 
at Antioch (Gal. ii. 11—21), and all that this account 
reveals to us,—the arrival of the emissaries from 
James in the pagan-Christian circle, the counter- 
mission organized by the Judaizers to rectify the 
work of Paul. A new situation suddenly presents 
itself to the eyes of the Apostle on his return from his 
second missionary journey. He is compelled to throw 
himself into the struggle, and in doing so to formulate 


* In his L’apdtve Paul: esguisse dune histoire de sa pensée, an 
admirable work, to which the writer is under great obligation. 





ii,11-18.] PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 133 





in all its rigour his principle of the abolishment of the 
Law.” 

The “troublers ” in this instance were ‘‘certain from 
James.” Like the “false brethren” * who appeared at 
Antioch three years before, they came from the mother 
Church, over which James presided. The Judaizing 
teachers at Corinth had their “ commendatory letters” 
(2 Cor. iii. 1), derived assuredly from the same quarter. 
In all likelihood, their confederates in Galatia brought 
similar credentials. We have already seen that the 
authority of the Primitive Church was the chief 
weapon used by Paul’s adversaries. These letters of 
commendation were part of the machinery of the anti- 
Pauline agitation. How the Judaizers obtained these 
credentials, and in what precise relation they stood to 
James, we can only conjecture. Had the Apostle held 
James responsible for their action, he would not have 
spared him any more than he has done, Peter. James 
held a quasi-pastoral relation to Christian Jews of the 
Dispersion. And as he addressed his Epistle to them, 
so he.would be likely on occasion to send delegates 
to visit them. Perhaps the Circumcisionists found 
opportunity to pass themselves off in this character; 
or they may have abused a commission really given 
them, by interfering with Gentile communities. That 
the Judaistic emissaries in some way or other adopted 
false colours, is plainly intimated in 2 Cor. xi. 13. 
James, living always at Jerusalem, being moreover a 
man of simple character, could have little suspected 
the crafty plot which was carried forward under his 
name. 

These agents addressed themselves in the first 





* See Chapter VII. pp. 109, 110. 





134 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


instance to the Jews, as their commission from Jeru- 
salem probably entitled them to do, They plead for 
the maintenance of the sacred customs. They insist 
that the Mosaic rites carry with them an indelible 
sanctity ; that their observance constitutes a Church 
within the Church. If this separation is once esta- 
blished, and the Jewish believers in Christ can be 
induced to,hold themselves aloof and to maintain the 
“advantage of circumcision,” the rest will be easy. 
The way will then be open to ‘‘compel the Gentiles to 
Judaize.” For unless they do this, they must be content 
to remain on a lower level, in a comparatively menial 
position, resembling that of uncircumcised proselytes in 
the Synagogue. The circular of the Jerusalem Council 
may have been interpreted by the Judaists in this 
sense, as though it laid down the terms, not of full 
communion between Jew and Gentile believers, but 
only of a permissive, secondary recognition. At Antioch 
the new campaign of the Legalists was opened, and 
apparently with signal success. In Galatia and Corinth 
we see it in full progress. 

The withdrawal of Peter and the other Jews at 
Antioch from the table of the Gentiles virtually 
“compelled” the latter “to Judaize.” Not that the 
Jewish Apostle had this intention in his mind. He 
was made the tool of designing men. By “ separating 
himself” he virtually said to every uncircumcised 
brother, “Stand by thyself, I am holier than thou.” 
Legal conformity on the part of the Gentiles was made 
the condition of their communion with Jewish Christians 
—a demand simply fatal to Christianity. It re- 
established the principle of salvation by works in a 
more invidious form. ‘To supplement the righteousness 
of faith by that of law, meant to supplantit. To admit 


ii,11-18.] PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 135 





that the Israelite by virtue of his legal observances 
stood in a higher position than “‘sinners of the Gentiles,” 
was to stultify the doctrine of the cross, to make Christ’s 
death a gratuitous sacrifice. Peter’s error, pushed to 
its logical consequences, involved the overthrow of 
the Gospel. This the Gentile Apostle saw at a glance. 
The situation was one of imminent danger. Paul 
needed all his wisdom, and all his courage and prompti- 
tude to meet it. 

It had been Peter’s previous rule, since the vision of . 
Joppa, to lay aside Jewish scruples of diet and to live 
in free intercourse with Gentile brethren. He “was 
wont to eat with the Gentiles. Though a born Jew, 
he lived in Gentile fashion’”—words unmistakably 
describing Peter’s general habit in such circumstances. 
This Gentile conformity of Peter was a fact of no 
small moment for the Galatian readers. It contravenes 
the assertion of a radical divergence between Petrine 
and Pauline Christianity, whether made by Ebionites 
or Baurians. 

The Jewish Apostle’s present conduct was an act 
of ‘‘dissimulation.” He was belying his known con- 
victions, publicly expressed and acted on for years. 
Paul’s challenge assumes that his fellow-Apostle is 
acting insincerely. And this assumption is explained 
by the account furnished in the Acts of the Apostles 
respecting Peter's earlier relations with Gentile 
Christianity (ch. x. I—xi. 18; xv. 6—11). The 
strength of Paul’s case lay in the conscience of Peter 
himself. The conflict at Antioch, so often appealed 
to in proof of the rooted opposition between the two 
Apostles, in reality gives evidence to the contrary 
effect. Here the maxim strictly applies, Exceptio probat 
vegulam. 





136 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Peter’s lapse is quite intelligible. No man who 
figures in the New Testament is better known to us. 
Honest, impulsive, ready of speech, full of contagious 
enthusiasm, brave as a lion, firm as a rock against open 
enemies, he possessed in a high degree the qualities 
which mark out a leader of men. He was of the stuff 
of which Christ makes His missionary heroes. But 
there was a strain of weakness in Peter's nature. He 
was pliable. He was too much at the mercy of sur- 
roundings. His denial of Jesus set this native fault 
in a light terribly vivid and humiliating. It was an act 
of “dissimulation.” In his soul there was a fervent 
love to Christ. His zeal had brought him to the place 
of danger. But for the moment he was alone. Public 
opinion was all against him. A panic fear seized his brave 
heart. He forgot himself; he denied the Master whom 
he loved more than life. His courage had failed; never 
his faith. ‘Turned back again” from his coward flight, 
Peter had indeed “strengthened his brethren” (Luke 
xxii. 31, 32). He proved a tower of strength to the 
infant Church, worthy of his cognomen of the rock. 
For more than twenty years he had stood unshaken. 
No name was so honoured in the Church as Peter's. 
For Paul to be compared to him was the highest 
possible distinction. 

And yet, after all this lapse of time, and in the midst 
of so glorious a career, the old, miserable weakness 
betrays him once more. How admonitory is the lesson ! 
The sore long since healed over, the infirmity of nature 
out of which we seemed to have been completely trained, 
may yet break out again, to our shame and undoing. 
Had Peter for a moment forgotten the sorrowful warn- 
ing of Gethsemane? Be it ours to “ watch and pray, 
lest we enter into temptation.” 


ii. 11-18.] PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCG. 137 





We have reason to believe that, if Peter rashly erred, 
he freely acknowledged his error, and honoured his 
reprover. Both the Epistles that bear his name, in 
different ways, testify to the high value which their 
author set upon the teaching of “our beloved brother 
Paul.” Tradition places the two men at Rome side by 
side in their last days; as though even in their death 
these glorious Apostles should not be divided, despite 
the attempts of faction and mistrust to separate them. 

Few incidents exhibit more strongly than this the 
grievous consequences that may ensue from a seemingly 
trivial moral error. It looked a little thing that Peter 
should prefer to take his meals away from Gentile 
company. And yet, as Paul tells him, his withdrawal 
was a virtual rejection of the Gospel, and imperilled 
the most vital interests of Christianity. By this act 
the Jewish Apostle gave a handle to the adversaries 
of the Church which they have used for generations 
and for ages afterwards. The dispute which it occa- 
sioned could never be forgotten. In the second century 
it still drew down on Paul the bitter reproaches of the 
Judaizing faction. And in our own day the rationalistic 
critics have been able to turn it to marvellous account. 
It supplies the corner-stone of their “scientific recon- 
struction” of Biblical theology. The entire theory of 
Baur is evolved out of Peter’s blunder. Let it be 
granted that Peter in yielding to the ‘certain from 
James” followed his genuine convictions and the tra- 
dition of Jewish Christianity, and we see at once how 
deep a gulf lay between Paul and the Primitive Church. 
All that Paul argues in the subsequent discussion only 
tends, in this case, to make the breach more visible. 
This false step of Peter is the thing that chiefly 
lends a colour to the theory in question, with all the 


138 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


far-reaching consequences touching the origin and 
import of Christianity, which it involves. So long 
“the evil that men do lives after them”! 

Paul’s rebuke of his brother Apostle extends to the 
conclusion of the chapter. Some interpreters cut it 
short at the end of ver. 14; others at ver. 16; others 
again at ver. 18. But the address is consecutive and 
germane to the occasion throughout. Paul does not, 
to be sure, give a verbatim report, but the substance of 
what he said, and in a form suited to his readers. The 
narrative is an admirable prelude to the argument of 
chap. iii. It forms the transition from the historical 
to the polemical part of the Epistle, from the Apostle’s 
personal to his doctrinal apology. The condensed 
form of the speech makes its interpretation difficult and 
much contested. We shall in the remainder of this 
Chapter trace the general course of Paul’s reproof, pro- 
posing in the following Chapter to deal more fully with 
its doctrinal contents. 

I. In the first place, Paul taxes the Jewish Apostle 
with insincerity and unfaithfulness toward the gospel. 
‘‘T saw,” he says, “ that they were not holding a straight 
course, according to the truth of the gospel.” 

It is a moral, not a doctrinal aberration, that Paul 
lays at the door of Cephas and Barnabas. They did not 
hold a different creed from himself; they were disloyal 
to the common creed. They swerved from the path of 
rectitude in which they had walked hitherto. They 
had regard no longer to “the truth of the gospel ”"— 
the supreme consideration of the servant of Christ— 
but to the favour of men, to the public opinion of 
Jerusalem. ‘What will be said of us there?” they 
whispered to each other, “if these messengers of James 
report that we are discarding the sacred customs, and 


* 


ii, 11-18] PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 139 
making no difference between Jew and Gentile? We 
shall alienate our Judean brethren. We shall bring a 
scandal on the Christian cause in the eyes of Judaism.” 

This withdrawal of the Jews from the common fellow- 
ship at Antioch was a public matter. It was an injury 
to the whole Gentile-Christian community. If the 
reproof was to be salutary, it must be equally public 
and explicit. The offence was notorious. Every one 
deplored it, except those who shared it, or profited by 
it. Cephas “stood condemned.” And yet his influ- 
ence and the reverence felt toward him were so great, 
that no one dared to put this condemnation into words. 
His sanction was of itself enough to give to this 
sudden recrudescence of Jewish bigotry the force of 
authoritative usage. “The truth of the gospel” was 
again in jeopardy. Once more Paul’s intervention 
foiled the attempts of the Judaizers and saved Gentile 
liberties. And this time he stood quite alone. Even 
the faithful Barnabas deserted him. But what mattered 
that, if Christ and truth were on his side? Avmucus 
Cephas, amicus Barnabas; sed magis amicus Veritas. 
Solitary amid the circle of opposing or dissembling 
Jews, Paul ‘‘ withstood” the chief of the Apostles of 
Jesus “to the face.” He rebuked him “before them 
all.” 

II. Peter’s conduct is reproved by Paul 7 the light 
of their common knowledge of salvation in Christ. 

Paul is not content with pointing out the inconsis- 
tency of his brother Apostle. He must probe the 
matter to the bottom. He will bring Peter’s delinquency 
to the touchstone of the Gospel, in its fundamental 
principles. So he passes in ver. 15 from the outward 
to the inward, from the circumstances of Peter’s con- 
duct to the inner world of spiritual consciousness, in 


140 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


which his offence finds its deeper condemnation. 
“ You and I,” he goes on to say, “ not Gentile sinners, 
but men of Jewish birth—yet for all that, knowing 
that there is no justification for man in works of law, 
only * through faith in Christ—we too put our faith in 
Christ, in order to be justified by faith in Him, not by 
works of law; for as Scripture taught us, in that way 
no flesh will be justified.” 

Paul makes no doubt that the Jewish Apostle’s 
experience of salvation corresponded with his own. 
Doubtless, in their previous intercourse, and especially 
when he first ‘made acquaintance with Cephas” (ch. i. 
18) in Jerusalem, the hearts of the two men had been 
opened to each other; and they had found that, although 
brought to the knowledge of the truth in different ways, 
yet in the essence of the matter—in respect of the 
personal conviction of sin, in the yielding up of self- 
righteousness and native pride, in the abandonment of 
every prop and trust but Jesus Christ—their history 
had run the same course, and face answered to face. 
Yes, Paul knew that he had an ally in the heart of 
his friend. He was not fighting as one that beateth 
the air, not making a rhetorical flourish, or a parade 
of some favourite doctrine of his own; he appealed 
from Peter dissembling to Peter faithful and consistent. 
Peter’s dissimulation was a return to the Judaic ground 
of legal righteousness. By refusing to eat with un- 
circumcised men, he affirmed implicitly that, though 
believers in Christ, they were still to him ‘‘common and 
unclean,” that the Mosaic rites imparted a higher 
sanctity than the righteousness of faith, Now the 





* éay pi has the same partially exceptive force as el wh in ch. i. 7, 
19. Comp. Rom. xiv. 14; also Luke iv. 26, 27. 


ii. 11-18.) PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 141 
principles of evangelical and legal righteousness, of 
salvation by faith and by law-works, are diametrically 
opposed. It is logically impossible to maintain both. 
Peter had long ago accepted the former doctrine. He 
had sought salvation, just like any Gentile sinner, on 
the common ground of human guilt, and with a faith 
that renounced every consideration of Jewish privilege 
and legal performance. By what right can any Hebrew 
believer in Christ, after this, set himself above his 
Gentile brother, or presume to be by virtue of his 
circumcision and ritual law-keeping a holier man ? 
Such we take to be the import of Paul’s challenge 
in vv. 15, 16. 

III. Paul is met at this point by the stock objection 
to the doctrine of salvation by faith—an objection 
brought forward in the dispute at Antioch not, we 
should imagine, by Peter himself, but by the Judaistic 
advocates. To renounce legal righteousness was in effect, 
they urged, ¢o promote sin—nay, to make Christ Himself 
a minister of sin (ver. 17). 

Paul retorts the charge on those who make it. They 
promote sin, he declares, who set up legal righteousness 
again (ver. 18). The ob;ection is stated and met in the 
form of question and answer, as in Rom. iii. 5. We 
have in this sharp thrust and parry an example of the 
sort of fence which Paul must often have carried on 
in his discussions with Jewish opponents on these 
questions. 

We must not overlook the close verbal connection 
of these verses with the two last. The phrase “seek- 
ing to be justified in Christ” carries us back to the time 
when the two Apostles, self-condemned sinners, 
severally sought and found a new ground of righteous- 
ness in Him. Now when Peter and Paul did this, 


he 4 
vs ve 


142 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. <s 


they were “themselves also found * to be sinners,”— 
an experience how abasing to their Jewish pride! 
They made the great discovery that stripped them of 
legal merit, and brought them down in their own esteem 
to the level of common sinners. Peter’s confession may 
stand for both, when he said, abashed by the glory of 
Christ, ‘Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O 
Lord.” Now this style of penitence, this profound 
self-abasement in the presence of Jesus Christ, revolted 
the Jewish moralist. To Pharisaic sentiment it was 
ccntemptible. If justification by faith requires this, 
if it brings the Jew to so abject a posture and makes 
no difference between lawless and law-keeping, be- 
tween pious children of Abraham and heathen outcasts 
—if this be the doctrine of Christ, all moral distinctions 
are confounded, and Christ is “a minister of sin!” 
This teaching robs the Jew of the righteousness he 
before possessed ; it takes from him the benefit and 
honour that God bestowed upon his race! So, we 
doubt not, many a Jew was heard angrily exclaiming 
against the Pauline doctrine, both at Antioch and else- 
where. This conclusion was, in the view of the 
Legalist, a reductio ad absurdum of Paulinism. 

The Apostle repels this inference with the indignant 
bn) yévoito, Far be it! His reply is indicated by the 
very form in which he puts the question: “ If we were 
found sinners” (Christ did not make us such). “ The 
complaint was this,” as Calvin finely says: “Has 
Christ therefore come to take away from us the right- 
eousness of the Law, to make us polluted who were 
hcly? Nay, Paul says ;—he repels the blasphemy with 


* For this emphatic found, describing a process of moral conviction 
and inward discovery, comp. Rom. vii. 10, 18, 21; the whole passage 
strikingly illustrates the reminiscence of our text. 


ii, 11-18] PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 143 


detestation. For Christ did not introduce sin, but 
revealed it. He did not rob them of righteousness, 
but of the false show thereof.” * The reproach of the 
Judaizers was in reality the same that is urged against 
evangelical doctrine still—that it is zmmoral, placing 
the virtuous and vicious in the common category of 
simmers.” 

Ver. 18 throws back the charge of promoting sin 
upon the Legalist. It is the counterpart, not of ver. 19, 
but rather of ver. 17. The “transgressor” is the sinner 
in a heightened and more specific sense, one who 
breaks known and admitted law. f This word bears, 
in Paul’s vocabulary, a precise and strongly marked 
signification which is not satisfied by the common in- 
terpretation. It is not that Peter in setting up the 
Law which he had in principle overthrown, puts him- 
self in the wrong; nor that Peter in re-establishing the 
Law, contradicts the purpose of the Law itself (Chry- 
sostom, Lightfoot, Beet). This is to anticipate the 
next verse. In Paul’s view and according to the 
experience common to Peter with himself, law and 
transgression are concomitant, every man ‘‘ under law” 
is pso facto a transgressor. He who sets up the first, 
constitutes himself the second. And this is what Peter 
is now doing; although Paul courteously veils the 
fact by putting it hypothetically, in the first person. t 
After dissolving, so far as in him lay, the validity of 
legal righteousness and breaking down the edifice of 
justification by works, Peter is now building it up 





* Commentarii. in loc. 

+ See Grimm’s Zexzcon, or Trench’s V. 7. Synonyms, on this word. 
Comp. ch. iii. 19; Rom. ii. 23—27; iv. 15; v. 14. 

{ The Z of this sentence is quite indefinite. On the other haud 
ver. 19, with its emphatic éyydp, brings us intoa new vein of thought, 


144 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





again, and thereby constructing a prison-house for 
himself. Returning to legal allegiance, he returns to 
legal condemnation; * with his own hands he puts on 
his neck the burden of the Law’s curse, which through 
faith in Christ he had cast off. By this act of timid 
conformity he seeks to commend himself to Jewish 
opinion ; but it only serves, in the light of the Gospel, 
to “‘prove him a transgressor,” to ‘‘commend” f him 
in that unhappy character. This is Paul’s retort to the 
imputation of the Judaist. It carries the war into the 
enemies’ camp. ‘ No,” says Paul, ‘‘Christ is no patron 
of sin, in bidding men renounce legal righteousness. 
But those promote sin—in themselves first of all—who 
after knowing His righteousness, turn back again to 
legalism.” 

IV. The conviction of Peter is now complete. From 
the sad bondage to which the Jewish Apostle, by his 
compliance with the Judaizers, was preparing to sub- 
mit himself, the Aposile turns to his own joyous sense of 
deliverance (vv. 19—21). Those who resort to legalism, 
he has said, ensure their own condemnation. It is, 
on the other hand, by an entire surrender to Christ, by 
realizing the import of His death, that we learn to 
“live unto God.” So Paul had proved it. At this 
moment he is conscious of a union with the crucified 
and living Saviour, which lifts him above the curse of 
the law, above the power of sin. To revert to the 
Judaistic state, to dream any more of earning righteous- 
ness by legal conformity, is a thing for him incon- 
ceivable. It would be to make void the cross of 
Christ ! 

And it was the Law itself that first impelled Paul 


* Comp. ch. iii, 1o—12, 19 ; Rom. iii. 20 ; iv. 15. 
¢ This verb has, as Schott suggests, a tinge of irony, 


ii. 11-18.) PAUL AND PETER AT ANTIOCH. 145 


along this path. ‘Through law” he “died to law.” 
The Law drove him from itself to seek salvation in 
Jesus Christ. Its accusations allowed him no shelter, 
left him no secure spot on which to build the edifice of 
his self-righteousness. It said to him unceasingly, 
Thou art a transgressor.* He who seeks justification 
by its means contradicts the Law, while he frustrates 
the grace of God. 


* Rom. vii. 7—viii. 1. 


CHAPTER X. 
THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE, 


**For I through law died unto law, that I might live unto God. I 
have been crucified with Christ; and 7¢ zs no longer I ¢hat live, but 
Christ liveth in me: and that /zfe which I now live in the flesh I live 
in faith, ¢he faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and 
gave Himself up for me. I do not make void the grace of God's 
for if righteousness is through Fait then Christ died for noug 
GAL, li, 19—21. 


AUL'’S personal apology is ended. He has proved 

his Apostolic independence, and made good his 
declaration, ‘‘ My Gospel is not according to man.” If 
he owed his commission to any man, it was to Peter; 
so his traducers persistently alleged. He has shown 
that, first without Peter, then im equality with Peter, and 
finally 7 spite of Peter, he had received and maintained 
it. Similarly in regard to James and the Jerusalem 
Church. Without their mediation Paul commenced his 
work ; when that work was challenged, they could only 


approve it; and when afterwards men professing to act_ 


in their name disturbed his work, the Apostle had 
repelled them. He acted all along under the conscious- 
ness of a trust in the gospel committed to him directly 
by Jesus Christ, and an authority in its administration 


second to none upon earth. And events had justified 


this confidence. 


ii. 19-21] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 147 

Paul is compelled to say all this about himself. The 
vindication of his ministry is forced from him by the 
calumnies of false brethren. From the time of the 
conference at Jerusalem, and still more since he with- 
stood Peter at Antioch, he had been a mark for the 
hatred of the Judaizing faction. He was the chief 
obstacle to their success. Twice he had foiled them, 
when they counted upon victory. They had now set 
on foot a systematic agitation against him, with its 
head-quarters at Jerusalem, carried on under some pre- 
text of sanction from the authorities of the Church there. 
At Corinth and in Galatia the legalist emissaries had 
appeared simultaneously ; they pursued in the main the 
same policy, adapting it to the character and disposition 
of the two Churches, and appealing with no little suc- 
cess to the Jewish predilections common even amongst 
Gentile believers in Christ. 

In this controversy Paul and the gospel he preached 
were bound together. “I am set,” he says, “for the 
defence of the gospel” (Ph. i. 16). He was the cham- 
pion of the cross, the impersonation of the principle of 
salvation by faith. It is “the gospel of Christ,” the 
“truth of the gospel,” he reiterates, that is at stake. 
If he wards off blows falling upon him, it is because 
they are aimed through him at the truth for which he 
lives—nay, at Christ who lives in him. In his self- 
assertion there is no note of pride or personal anxiety. 
Never was there a man more completely lost in the 
greatness of a great cause, nor who felt himself in com- 
parison with it more worthless. But that cause has 
lifted Paul with it to imperishable glory. Of all names 
named on earth, none stands nearer than his to that 
which is “ above every name.” 

While Paul in ch. i. and ii. is busy with his own 


148 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
vindication, he is meantime behind the personal defence 
preparing the doctrinal argument. His address to Peter 
is an incisive outline of the gospel of grace. The three 
closing verses—the Xpictd cuvectavpwpat in par- 
ticular—are the heart of Paul’s theology—summa ac 
medulla Christianismi (Bengel). Such a testimony was 
the Apostle’s best defence before his audience at 
Antioch ; it was the surest means of touching the heart 
of Peter and convincing him of his error, And its re- 
cital was admirably calculated to enlighten the Galatians 
as to the true bearing of this dispute which had been 
so much misrepresented. From ver. 15 onwards, Paul 
has been all the while addressing, under the person 
of Peter, the conscience of his readers,* and paving the 
way for the assault that he makes upon them with so 
much vigour in the first verses of ch. iii. Read in 
the light of the foregoing narrative, this passage is a 
compendium of the Pauline Gospel, invested with the 
peculiar interest that belongs to a confession of personal 
faith, made at a signal crisis in the author’s life. Let 
us examine this momentous declaration. 

I. At the foundation of Paul’s theology lies his 
conception of the grace of God. 

Grace is the Apostle’s watchword. The word occurs 
twice as often in his Epistles as it does in the rest of 
the New Testament. Outside the Pauline Luke and 
Hebrews, and 1 Peter with its large infusion of Paulin- 
ism, it is exceedingly rare.t In this word the character, 
spirit, and aim of the revelation of Christ, as Paul 


* Hofmann is so far right when he makes the Apostle turn to the 
Galatians in ch. ii, 15, and draws at this point the line between the 
historical and doctrinal sections of the Epistle. 

+~ What is said of xdpis, applies also to its derivatives, xapifouat, 
KT, 


ii, 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 149 





understood it, are summed up. “The grace of God” 
is the touchstone to which Peter's dissimulation is 
finally brought. Christ is the embodiment of Divine 
grace—above all, in His death. So that it is one and 
the same thing to “ bring to nought the grace of God,” 
and “ the death of Christ.” Hence God’s grace is called 
“the grace of Christ,”—“of our Lord Jesus Christ.” 
From Romans to Titus and Philemon, ‘grace reigns” 
in every Epistle. No one can counterfeit this mark of 
Paul, or speak of grace in his style and accent. 

God's grace is not His love alone; it is redeeming 
love—love poured out upon the undeserving, love 
coming to seek and save the lost, “ bringing salvation 
to all men” (Rom. v. 1—8; Tit. ii. 11). Grace decreed 
redemption, made the sacrifice, proclaims the recon- 
ciliation, provides and bestows the new sonship of the 
Spirit, and schools its children into all the habits of 
godliness and virtue that beseem their regenerate life, 
which it brings finally to its consummation in the life 
eternal.* 

Grace in God is therefore the antithesis ot sim in 
man, counterworking and finally triumphing over it. 
Grace belongs to the last Adam as eminently as sin to 
the first. The later thoughts of the Apostle on this 
theme are expressed in Tit. ili. 4—7, a passage singu- 
larly rich in its description of the working of Divine 
grace on human nature. “We were senseless,” he 
says, “disobedient, wandering in error, in bondage to 
lusts and pleasures of many kinds, living in envy and 
malice, hateful, hating each other. But when the kind- 
ness and love to man of our Saviour God shone forth,’”— 
then all was changed: ‘not by works wrought in our 


* Eph. i. 5—9; 2 Tim. i. 9; Rom. iii. 24; Heb. ii. 9; 2 Cor. v. 20— 
vi. 1; Gal. iv. 5; Tit. iii, 5—7; ii. 11—14; Rom. vy. 21. 


' 


a 


150 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


own righteousness, but according to His merey He 
saved us, through the washing of regeneration and re- 
newing of the Holy Spirit, that, justified by His grace, 
we might be made heirs in hope of life eternal.” The 
vision of the grace of God drives stubbornness, lust, and 
hatred from the soul. It brings about, for man and 
for society, the palingenesta, the new birth of Creation, 
rolling back the tide of evil and restoring the golden 
age of peace and innocence ; and crowns the joy of a 
renovated earth with the glories of a recovered heaven. 

Being the antagonist of sin, grace comes of necessity 
into contrast with ¢he /aw. Law is intrinsically the 
opposer of sin; sin is “lawlessness,” with Paul as 
much as with John.* But law was powerless to cope 
with sin: it was “weak through the flesh.” Instead 
of crushing sin, the interposition of law served to 
inflame and stimulate it, to bring into play its latent 
energy, reducing the man most loyally disposed to 
moral despair. ‘‘ By the law therefore is the knowledge 
of sin; it worketh out wrath.” Inevitably, it makes 
men transgressors; it brings upon them an inward 
condemnation, a crushing sense of the Divine anger 
and hostility.t That is all that law can do by itself. 
“Holy and just and good,” notwithstanding, to our 
perverse nature it becomes death (Rom. vii. 13; 1 Cor. 
xv. 56). It is actually “the strength of sin,” lending 
itself to extend and confirm its power. We find in it 
a “law of sin and death.” So that to be “under law ” 
and ‘under grace” are two opposite and mutually ex- 
clusive states. In the latter condition only is sin “ no 
longer our lord” (Rom. vi. 14). Peter and the Jews 
of Antioch therefore, in building up the legal principle 





* Rom. vii. 12, 143; 2 Thess. ii. 4—8; comp. 1 John iii. 4. 
t Rom. iii. 20; iv. 15; v. 20; vii. 5, 24; Gal. ii. 16 iii. 10, 11, 19. 


ii. 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 151 


again, were in truth “ abolishing the grace of God.” If 
the Galatians follow their example, Paul warns them that 
they will “ fall from grace.” Accepting circumcision, 
they become “debtors to perform the whole law,”—and 
that means transgression and the curse (ch. v. I—4; 
il. IO—12; li. 16—18). 

While sin is the reply which man’s nature makes to 
the demands of law, faith is the response elicited by 
grace; it is the door of the heart opening to grace.* 
Grace and Faith go hand in hand, as Law and Trans- 
gression. Limiting the domain of faith, Peter virtually 
denied the sovereignty of grace. He belied his con- 
fession made at the Council of Jerusalem : “ By the grace 
of the Lord Jesus we érust to be saved, even as the 
Gentiles ” (Acts xv. 11). With Law are jeined such 
terms as Works, Debt, Reward, Glorying, proper to a 
“righteousness of one’s own.”f With Grace we asso- 
ciate Gift, Promise, Predestination, Call, Election, Adop- 
tion, Inheritance, belonging to the dialect of ‘ the right- 
eousness which is of God by faith.” { Grace operates 
in the region of “the Spirit,” making for freedom ; but 
law, however spiritual in origin, has come to seek its 
accomplishment in the sphere of the flesh, where it 
“ gondereth to bondage” (ch. iv. 23—v. 5; 2 Cor. iii. 
6, 17). 

Grace appears, however, in another class of passages 
in Paul’s Epistles, of which ch. i. 15, ii. 9 are 
examples. To the Divine grace Paul ascribes his 
personal salvation and Apostolic call. The revelation 
which made him a Christian and an Apostle, was above 


* Rom. iii. 24, 25 ; Eph. ii. 8; etc. 

7 Rom iv. 1—4 ; xi. 6; Gal ii. 16; iii. 12. 

f Rom. iv. 16; viii. 28—39; xi 5; Eph it 4—6; Tit. iii. 7; 
Acts xx. 32; Gal. iii. 18: d¢ éwayyeNias Kexdpiorac 6 Ceés. 


152 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


all things a manifestation of grace. Wearing this 
aspect, “the glory of God” appeared to him “in the 
face of Jesus Christ.” The splendour that blinded and 
overwhelmed Saul on his way to Damascus, was “ the 
glory of His grace.” The voice of Jesus that fell on 
the persecutor’s ear spoke in the accents of grace. No 
scourge of the Law, no thunders of Sinai, could have 
smitten down the proud Pharisee, and beaten or 
scorched out of him his strong self-will, like the com- 
plaint of Jesus. All the circumstances tended to stamp 
upon his soul, fused into penitence in that hour, the in- 
effaceable impression of ‘‘ the grace of God and of our 
Saviour Jesus Christ.” Such confessions as those of 
1 Cor. xv. 8—10, and Eph. ii. 7, iii. 7, 8, show how con- 
stantly this remembrance was present with the Apostle 
Paul and suffused his views of revelation, giving to his 
ministry its peculiar tenderness of humility and ardour 
of gratitude. This sentiment of boundless obligation 
to the grace of God, with its pervasive effect upon the 
Pauline doctrine, is strikingly expressed in the doxology 
of 1 Tim. i. 11—17,—words which it is almost a 
sacrilege to put into the mouth of a fa/sarius: “ Accord- 
ing to the gospel of the glory of the blessed God, 
wherewith J was intrusted, . . . who was aforetime a 
blasphemer and persecutor. . . But the grace of our 
Lord abounded even more exceedingly. Faithful is 
the saying, worthy to be received of all, ‘Christ Jesus 
came into the world to save sinners’—of whom J am 
chief. . . . In me as chief Christ Jesus showed forth 
all His long-suffering. . . Now to the King of the 
ages be honour and glory for ever. Amen.” Who, 
reading the Apostle’s story, does not echo that Amen ? 
No wonder that Paul became the Apostle of grace; even 
as John, “the disciple whom Jesus loved,” must per- 


ii, 19-21.) THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 153 











force be the Apostle of Jove. First to him was God's 
grace revealed in its largest affluence, that through him 
it might be known to all men and to all ages. 

II. Side by side with the grace of God, we find in 
ver. 21 the death of Christ. He sets aside the former, 
the Apostle argues, who by admitting legal righteous- 
ness nullifies the latter. 

While grace embodies Paul’s fundamental conception 
of the Divine character, the death of Christ is the 
fundamental fact in which that character manifests 
itself. So the cross becomes the centre of Paul’s 
theology. But it was, in the first place, the basis of 
his personal life. ‘Faith in the Son of God, who 
loved me and gave Himself up for me,” is the founda- 
tion of “ the life he now lives in the flesh.” 

Here lay the stumbling-block of Judaism. Theocratic 
_ pride, Pharisaic tradition, could not, as we say, get 
over it. A crucified Messiah! How revolting the bare 
idea. But when, as in Paul’s case, Judaistic pride did 
surmount this huge scandal and in spite of the offence 
of the cross arrive at faith in Jesus, it was at the cost 
of a severe fall. It was broken in pieces,—destroyed 
once and for ever. With the elder Apostles the change 
had been more gradual; they were never steeped in 
Judaism as Saul was. For him to accept the faith of 
Jesus was a revolution the most complete and drastic 
possible. As a Judaist, the preaching of the cross 
was an outrage on his faith and his Messianic hopes ; 
now it was that which most of all subdued and 
entranced him. Its power was extreme, whether to 
attract or repel. The more he had loathed and mocked 
at it before, the more he is bound henceforth to exalt 
the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ. A proof of the 
Divine anger against the Nazarene he had once deemed 


154 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





it; now he sees in it the token of God’s grace in Him 
to the whole world. 

For Paul therefore the death of Christ imported the 
end of Judaism. “I died to law,” he writes,—“ 1 am 
crucified with Christ.” Once understanding what this 
death meant, and realising his own relation to it, on 
every account it was impossible to go back to Legalism. 
The cross barred all return, The law that put Him, 
the sinless One, to death, could give no life to sinful 
men. The Judaism that pronounced His doom, doomed 
itself. Who would make peace with it over the 
Saviour’s blood? From the moment that Paul knew 
the truth about the death of Jesus, he had done with 
Judaism for ever. Henceforth he knew nothing— 
cherished no belief or sentiment, acknowledged no 
maxim, no tradition, which did not conform itself to 
His death. The world to which he had belonged 


died, self-slain, when it slew Him. From Christ's” 


grave a new world was rising, for which alone Paul 
lived. 


But why should the grace of God take expression in- 


a fact so appalling as Christ’s death? What has 
death to do with grace? It is the legal penalty of sin. 
The conjunction of sin and death pervades the teaching 
of Scripture, and is a principle fixed in the conscience 
of mankind. Death, as man knows it, is the inevitable 
consequence and the universal witness of his trans- 
gression. He “carries about in his mortality the 
testimony that God is angry with the wicked every 
day” (Augustine). The death of Jesus Christ cannot 
be taken out of this category. He died a sinners 
death. He bore the penalty of guilt. The prophetic 
antecedents of Calvary, the train of circumstances 
connected with it, His own explanations in chief—are 


ii. 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 155 


all in keeping with this purpose. With amazement we 
behold the Sinless “ made sin,” the Just dying for the 
unjust. He was “born of a woman, born under law”: 
under law He lived—and died. Grace is no law-breaker. 
God must above all things be “just Himself,” if He 
is to justify others (Rom. iii. 26). The death of Jesus 
declares it. That sublime sacrifice is, as one might 
say, the resultant of grace and law. Grace “ gives 
Him up for us all;” it meets the law’s claims in Him, 
even to the extreme penalty, that from us the penalty 
may be lifted off. He puts Himself under law, in order 
“to buy out those under law” (ch. iv. 4, 5). In virtue 
of the death of Christ, therefore, men are dealt with on 
an extra-legal footing, on terms of grace ; not because 
Jaw is ignored or has broken down ; but because it is 
satisfied beforehand. God has “ set forth Christ Jesus 
a propitiation ”; and in view of that accomplished fact, 
He proceeds “in the present time” to “justify him 
who is of faith in Jesus” (Rom. iii. 22—26). Legalism 
is at an end, for the Law has spent itself on our 
Redeemer. For those that are in Him “there is now 
no condemnation.” This is to anticipate the fuller 
teaching of ch. iii. ; but the vicarious sacrifice is already 
implied when Paul says, ‘‘ He gave Himself up for me 
—gave Himself for our sins” (ch. i. 4). 

The resurrection of Christ is, in Paul’s thought, the 
other side of His death. They constitute one event, 
the obverse and reverse of the same reality. For Paul, 
as for the first Apostles, the resurrection of Jesus gave 
to His death an aspect wholly different from that it 
previously wore. But the transformation wrought in 
their minds during the “‘ forty days,” in his case came 
about in a single moment, and began from a different 
starting-point. Instead of being the merited punish- 


ae 


156 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS 


ment of a blasphemer and false Messiah, the death of 
Calvary became the glorious self-sacrifice of the Son 
of God. The dying and rising of Jesus were blended 
in the Apostle’s mind; he always sees the one in the 
light of the other. The faith that saves, as he formu- 
lates it, is at once a faith that Christ died for our sins, 
and that God raised Him from the dead on the third 
day.* Whichever of the two one may first apprehend, 
it brings the other along with it. The resurrection is 
not an express topic of this Epistle. Nevertheless it 
meets us in its first sentence, where we discern that 
Paul’s knowledge of the gospel and his call to pro- 
claim it, rested upon this fact. In the passage before 
us the resurrection is manifestly assumed. If the 
Apostle is “crucified with Christ,”—and yet ‘ Christ 
iives in him,” it is not simply the teaching, or the 
mission of Jesus that lives over again in Paul; the die 
of the risen Saviour has itself entered into his soul. 

III. This brings us to the thought of the union of the 
believer with Christ in death and life, which is expressed 
in terms of peculiar emphasis and distinctness in 
ver. 20. “With Christ I have been crucified; and 
IZ live no longer; it is Christ that lives in me. My 
earthly life is governed by faith in Him who loved 
me and died for me.” Christ and Paul are one. When 
Christ died, Paul’s former self died with Him. Now 
it is the Spirit of Christ in heaven that lives within 
Paul’s body here on earth. 

This union is first of all @ communion with the dying 
Saviour. Paul does not think of the sacrifice of Calvary 
as something merely accomplished for him, outside 
himself, by a legal arrangement in which one person 


* 1 Cor. xv. 3, 4, 11; Rom. iv. 24, 25 ; x. 9; 1 Thess. iv. 14. 


ii. 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 157 
takes the place of another and, as it were, personates 
him. The nexus between Christ and Paul is deeper 
than this. Christ is the centre and soul of the race, 
holding towards it a spiritual primacy of which Adam’s 
natural headship was a type, mediating between men 
and God in all the relations which mankind holds to 
God.* The death of Jesus was more than substitu- 
tionary; it was representative. He had every right 
to act for us. He was the “One” who alone could 
“ die for all;” in Him “all died” (2 Cor. v. 14,15). He 
carried us with Him to the cross; His death was in 
effect the death of those who sins He bore. There 
was no legal fiction here; no federal compact extem- 
_ porised for the occasion. ‘The second Man from 
heaven,” if second in order of time, was first and 
fundamental in the spiritual order, the organic Head 
of mankind, “the root,” as well as “the offspring” .of 
humanity.t The judgement that fell upon the race was 
a summons to Him who held in His hands its interests 
and destinies. Paul’s faith apprehends and endorses 
what Christ has done on his behalf, —“ who loved me,” 
he cries, “and gave Himself up for me.” When the 
Apostle says, “I have been crucified with Christ,” he 
goes back in thought to the scene of Calvary; there, 
potentially, all that was done of which he now realises 
in himself the issue. His present salvation is, so to 
speak, a rehearsal of the Saviour’s death, a “like- 
ness” (Rom. vi. 5) of the supreme act of atonement, 
which took place once for all when Christ died for 
our sins. 

Faith is the link between the past, objective sacrifice, 
and the present, subjective apprehension of it, by which 


* Rom. v. 143 1 Cor. xv. 22, 45—48; 1 Tim. ii. 5. 
{ 1 Cor. xv. 45—49; comp. Col. i. 15—17 ; John i. 4, 9, 15, 16. 


158 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





its virtue becomes our own. Without such faith, Christ 
would have “ died in vain.” His death must then have 
been a great sacrifice thrown away. Wilful unbelief 
repudiates what the Redeemer has done, provisionally, 
on our behalf. This repudiation, as individuals, we are 
perfectly free to make. “The objective reconciliation 
effected in Christ’s death can after all benefit actually, 
in their own personal consciousness, only those who 
know and acknowledge it, and feel themselves in their 
solidarity with Christ to be so much one with Him 
as to be able to appropriate inwardly His death and 
celestial life, and to live over again His life and death; 
those only, in a word, who truly de/eve in Christ. Thus 
the idea of substitution in Paul receives its complement 
and realisation in the mysticism of his conception of 
faith. While Christ objectively represents the whole 
race, that relation becomes a subjective reality only 
in the case of those who connect themselves with Him 
in faith in such a way as to fuse together with Him 
into one spirit and one body, as to find in Him their 
Head, their soul, their life and self, and He in them 
His body, His members and His temple. Thereby the 
idea of ‘one for all’ receives the stricter meaning of 
‘all in and with one.’ ”* 

Partaking the death of Christ, Paul has come to 
share in His risen life. On the cross he owned his 
Saviour—owned His wounds, His shame, His agony 
of death, and felt himself therein shamed, wounded, 
slain to death. Thus joined to his Redeemer, as by 
the nails that fastened Him to the tree, Paul is carried 


* Pfleiderer, Hibbert Lectures, pp. 65,6. Dr. Pfleiderer’s delicate and 
sympathetic interpretation of Paul's teaching (in these Lectures, and 
still more in his Pau/inzsm) has made all students of the Apostle his 
debtors, however much they may quarrel with his historical criticism. 


ii, 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. “159 


with Him down into the grave—into the grave, and 
out again! Christ is risen from the dead: so therefore 
is Paul. He “died to sin once,” and now “ liveth to 
God; death lords it over Him no more:” this Paul 
reckons equally true for himself (Rom. vi. 3-11). The 
Ego, the “old man” that Paul once was, lies buried in 
the grave of Jesus. 

Jesus Christ alone, “the Lord of the Spirit” has 
risen from that sepulchre,—has risen in the spirit of 
Paul. “If any one should come to Paul’s doors and 
ask, Who lives here? he would answer, Not Saul of 
Tarsus, but Jesus Christ lives in this body of mine.” 
In this appropriation of the death and rising of the 
Lord Jesus, this interpenetration of the spirit of Paul 
and that of Christ, there are three stages corresponding 
to the Friday, Saturday, and Sunday of Eastertide. 
“Christ died for our sins; He was buried; He rose 
again the third day:” so, by consequence, “I am 
crucified with Christ; no longer do I live; Christ 
liveth in me.” 

This mystic union of the soul and its Saviour bears 
fruit in the activities of outward iife. Faith is no mere 
abstract and contemplative affection; but a working 
energy, dominating and directing all our human facul- 
ties. It makes even the flesh its instrument, which 
defied the law of God, and betrayed the man to the 
bondage of sin and death. There is a note of triumph 
in the words,—“ the life I now live zz the flesh, I live in 
faith!” The impossible has been accomplished. ‘‘The 
body of death” is possessed by the Spirit of life in 
Christ Jesus (Rom. vi. 12; vii. 23—viii. 1). The 
flesh—the despair of the law—has become the sancti- 
fied vessel of grace. 

Paul’s entire theology of Redemption is contained 


160 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
in this mystery of union with Christ. The office of 
the Holy Spirit, whose communion holds together the 
glorified Lord and His members upon earth, is implied 
in the teaching of ver. 20. This is manifest, when in 
ch. iii. 2—5 we find the believer's union with Christ 
described as “receiving the Spirit, beginning in the 
Spirit ;” and when a little later “the promise of the 
Spirit” embraces the essential blessings of the new 
life.* The doctrine of the Church is also here. For 
those in whom Christ dwells have therein a common 
life. which knows no “ Jew and Greek; all are one 
man” in Him.t Justification and sanctification alike 
are here; the former being the realisation of our share 
in Christ's propitiation for sin, the latter our participa- 
tion in His risen life, spent “to God.” Finally, the 
resurrection to eternal life and the heavenly glory of 
the saints spring from their present fellowship with the 
Redeemer. ‘The Spirit that raised Jesus from the 
dead, dwelling in us, shall raise our mortal body” to 
share with the perfected spirit His celestial life. The 
resurrection of Christ is the earnest of that which all 
His members will attain,—nay, the material creation 
is to participate in the glory of the sons of God, made 
like to Him, the “ firstborn of many brethren” (Rom, 
viii. 11, 16—23, 29, 30; Phil. iii. 20, 21). 





In all these vital truths Paul's gospel was traversed by 
the Legalism countenanced by Peter at Antioch. The 
Judaistic doctrine struck directly, if not avowedly, at the 
cross, whose reproach its promoters sought to escape. 
This charge is the climax of the Apostle’s contention 
against Peter, and the starting-point of his expostula- 





* Ch. iii. 14; iv. 6,73 v.53 1 Cor, vi. 17,19; Rom. viii. g—16. 
t Ch. iii. 28 ; Cel. iii. 11; Rom. xv. 5—7. 


ii. 19-21.] THE PRINCIPLES AT STAKE. 161 





tion with the Galatians in the following chapter. “ If 
righteousness could be obtained by way of law, then 
Christ died for nought!” What could one say worse 
of any doctrine or policy, than that it led to this? And 
if works of law actually justify men, and circumcision 
is allowed to make a difference between Jew and Greek 
before God, the principle of legalism is admitted, and the 
intolerable consequence ensues which Paul denounces. 
What did Christ die for, if men are able to redeem 
themselves after this fashion? How can any one dare 
to build up in face of the cross his paltry edifice of 
self-wrought goodness, and say by doing so that the 
expiation of Calvary was superfluous and that Jesus 
Christ might have spared Himself all that trouble ! 

And so, on the one hand, Legalism «znupugns 
the grace of God. It puts human relations to God 
on the footing of a debtor and creditor account ; 
it claims for man a ground for boasting in himself 
(Rom. iv. 1—4), and takes from God the glory of His 
grace. In its devotion to statute and ordinance, it 
misses the soul of obedience—the love of God, only to 
be awakened by the knowledge of His love to us (ch. v. 
14; I Johniv. 7—11). It sacrifices the Father in God 
to the King. It forgets that trust is the first duty of 
a rational creature toward his Maker, that the law of 
faith lies at the basis of all law for man. 

On the other hand, and by the same necessity, 
Legalism is fatal to the spiritual life in man, Whilst it 
clouds the Divine character, it dwarfs and petrifies the 
human. What becomes of the sublime mystery of the 
life hid with Christ in God, if its existence is made 
contingent on circumcision and ritual performance ? 
To men who put “meat and drink” on a level with 
“righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost,” 

II 


162 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





or in their intercourse with fellow-Christians set points 
of ceremony above justice, mercy, and faith, the very idea 
of a spiritual kingdom of God is wanting. The religion 
of Jesus and of Paul regenerates the heart, and from 
that centre regulates and hallows the whole ongoing of 
life. Legalism guards the mouth, the hands, the senses, 
and imagines that through these it can drill the man 
into the Divine order. The latter theory makes religion 
a mechanical system; the former conceives it as an 
inward, organic life. 





THE DOCTRINAL POLEMIC. 





Cuap. iii, I—v. 12, 











CHAPTER XI. 
THE GALATIAN FOLLY, 


*€O foolish Galatians, who did bewitch you, before whose eyes Jesus 
Christ was openly set forth crucified? This only would I learn from 
you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing 
of faith? Are ye so foolish ? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now 
perfected in the flesh? Did ye suffer so many things in vain? if it be 
indeed in vain. He therefore that supplieth to you the Spirit, and 
worketh miracles among you, doeth he zt by the works of the law, or 
by the hearing of faith? "—GAL. iii. I—5. 


T the beginning of ch. iii. falls the most marked 
division of this Epistle. So far, since the ex- 
ordium, its course has been strictly narrative. The 
Apostle has been “giving” his readers “to know” 
many things concerning himself and his relations to 
the Judean Church of which they had been ignorant or 
misinformed. Now this preliminary task is over. From 
explanation and defence he passes suddenly to the 
attack. He turns sharply round upon the Galatians, 
and begins to ply them with expostulation and argu- 
ment. It is for their sake that Paul has been telling 
this story of his past career. In the light of the 
narration just concluded, they will be able to see their 
folly and to understand how much they have been 
deceived. 
Here also the indignation so powerfully expressed 
in the Introduction, breaks forth again, directed this 


166 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





time, however, against the Galatians themselves and 
breathing grief more than anger. And just as after 
that former outburst the letter settled down into the 
sober flow of narrative, so from these words of reproach 
Paul passes on to the measured course of argument 
which he pursues through the next two chapters. In 
ch. iv. 8—20, and again in ch. v. I—12, doctrine 
gives way to appeal and warning. But these para- 
graphs still belong to the polemical division of the 
Epistle, extending from this point to the middle of 
ch. v. This section forms the central and principal 
part of the letter, and is complete in itself. Its last 
words, in ch. v. 6—12, will bring us round to the 
position from which we are now setting out. 

This chapter stands, nevertheless, in close connection 
of thought with the foregoing. The Apostle’s doctrine 
is grounded in historical fact and personal experience. 
The theological argument has behind it the weight 
of his proved Apostleship. The Judaistic dispute at 
Antioch, in particular, bears immediately on the subject- 
matter of the third chapter. Peter’s vacillation had its 
counterpart in the defection of the Galatians. The 
reproof and refutation which the elder Apostle brought . 
upon himself, Paul’s readers must have felt, touched 
them very nearly. In the crafty intriguers who made 
mischief at Antioch, they could see the image of the 
Judaists who had come into their midst. Above all, 
it was the cross which Cephas had dishonoured, whose 
efficacy he had virtually denied. His act of dissimula- 
tion, pushed to its issue, nullified the death of Christ. 
This is the gravamen of Paul’s impeachment. And 
it is the foundation of all his complaints against the 
Galatians. Round this centre the conflict is waged. 
By its tendency to enhance or diminish the glory of 


iii. 1-5.] THE GALATIAN FOLLY. | 167 


the Saviour’s cross, Paul judges of the truth of every 
teaching, the worth of every policy. Angel or Apostle, 
it matters not—whoever disparages the cross of Jesus 
Christ finds in Paul an unflinching enemy. The 
thought of Christ “dying in vain” rouses in him the 
strong emotion under which he indites the first verses 
of this chapter. What greater folly, what stranger 
bewitchment can there be, than for one who has seen 
“ Jesus Christ crucified” to turn away to some other 
spectacle, to seek elsewhere a more potent and diviner 
charm! ‘‘O senseless Galatians !” 

I. Here then was the beginning of their folly. The 
Galatians forgot their Saviour’s cross. 

This was the-first step in their backsliding. Had 
their eyes continued to be fixed on Calvary, the Legalists 
would have argued and cajoled in vain. Let the cross 
of Christ once lose its spell for us, let its influence fail 
to hold and rule the soul, and we are at the mercy of 
every wind of doctrine. We are like sailors in a dark 
night on a perilous coast, who have lost sight of the 
lighthouse beacon. Our Christianity will go to pieces. 
If Christ crucified should cease to be its sovereign 
attraction, from that moment the Church is doomed. 

This forgetfulness of the cross on the part of the 
Galatians is the more astonishing to Paul, because at 
first they had so vividly realised its power, and the 
scene of Calvary, as Paul depicted it,* had taken hold 
of their nature with extraordinary force. He was con- 
scious at the time—so his words seem to intimate— 





* The verb mpoeypagn (openly set forth) probably means fainted up 
rather than f/acarded. This more vivid meaning belongs to ypadw, 
and there is no sufficient reason why it should not attach to mpo-ypagdw. 
Itis entirely in place here. “Jesus Christ crucified” is not an announce- 
ment to be made, but an object to be delineated. 


168 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


that it was given him, amongst this susceptible people, 
to draw the picture with unwonted effect. The gaze 
of his hearers was rivetted upon the sight. It was as 
if the Lord Jesus hung there before their eyes. They 
beheld the Divine sufferer. They heard His cries of 
distress and of triumph. They felt the load which 
crushed Him. Nor was it their sympathies alone and 
their reverence, to which the spectacle appealed. It 
stirred their conscience to its depths. It awakened 
feelings of inward humiliation and contrition, of horror 
at the curse of sin, of anguish under the bitterness and 
blackness of its death. ‘It was you,” Paul would say— 
“you and I, for whom He died. Oury sins laid on Him 
that ignominy, those agonies of body and of spirit. 
He died the Just for the unjust, that He might bring 
us to God.” They looked, they listened, till their 
hearts were broken, till all their sins cried out against 
them; and in a passion of repentance they cast them- 
selves before the Crucified, and took Him for their 
Christ and King. From the foot of the cross they 
rose new men, with heaven’s light upon their brow, 
with the cry Adda, Father rising from their lips, with 
the Spirit of God and of Jesus Christ, the consciousness 
of a Divine sonship, filling their breast. 

Has all this passed away? Have the Galatians for- 
gotten the shame, the glory of that hour—the tears 
of penitence, the cries of joy and gratitude which the 
vision of the cross drew from their souls, the new 
creation it had wrought within them, the ardour of spirit 
and high resolve with which they pledged themselves 
to Christ’s service ? Was the influence of that trans- 
forming experience to prove no more enduring than 
the morning cloud and early dew? Foolish Galatians! 
Had they not the wit to see that the teaching of the 


iii. 1-5. THE GALATIAN FOLLY. 169 


Legalists ran counter to all they had then experienced, 
that it ‘made the death of Christ of none effect,” which 
had so mighty and saving. an effect upon themselves ? 
Were they “so senseless,” so bereft of reason and 
recollection? The Apostle is amazed. He cannot 
understand how impressions so powerful should prove 
so transient, and that truths thus clearly perceived and 
realised should come to be forgotten. Some fatal spell 
has been cast over them. They are “ bewitched” to 
act as they are doing. A deadly fascination, like that 
of the “ evil eye,” has paralyzed their minds. 

The ancient belief alluded to in the word the Apostle 
uses here,* is not altogether a superstition. The 
malignity that darts out in the glance of the “evil eye” 
is a presage of mischief. Not without reason does it 
cause a shudder. It is the sign of a demonic jealousy 
and hate. ‘Satan has entered into” the soul which 
emits it, as once into Judas. Behind the spite of the 
Jewish false brethren Paul recognised a preternatural 
malice and cunning, like that with which “ the Serpent 
beguiled Eve.” f To this darker source of the fascina- 
tion his question, ‘Who hath bewitched you?” 
appears to point. 

II. Losing sight of the cross of Christ, the Galatians 
were furthermore rejecting the Holy Spirit of God. 

This heavy reproach the Apostles urges upon his 


* On Bacxalvw see the note in Lightfoot’s Commentary 77 Joc. ; also 
Grimm’s N. T. Lexicon. “ The Scripture calleth envy an ‘evil eye ;’... 
so there still seemeth to be acknowledged in the act of envy an ejacula- 
tion or irradiation of the eye. Envy hath in it something of witchcraft. 
. . - It is the proper attribute of the Devil, who is called ‘The envious 
man, that soweth tares among the wheat by night.’”—(Lord Bacon: 
Essay ix.) 

7 Comp. 2 Cor. xi. I—4, a passage closely parallel to this context, 
containing what is expressed here and in Gal. i. 6, 7; iv. 11, 17, 18. 


170 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 
readers through the rest of the paragraph, pausing only 
for a moment in ver. 4 to recall their earlier sufferings 
for Christ’s sake in further witness against them. 
“T have but one question to put to you,” he says— 
“You received the Spirit: how did that come about ? 
Was it through what you did according to law? or 
what you heard in faith? You know well that this 
great blessing was given to your faith. Can you 
expect to retain this gift of God on other terms than 
those on which you received it? Have you begun 
with the Spirit to be brought to perfection by the 
flesh ? (ver. 3). ... Nay, God still bestows on you His 
Spirit, with gifts of miraculous energy; and I ask 
again, whether these displays attend on the practice of 
law-works, or upon faith’s hearing?” (ver. 5). 

The Apostle wished the Galatians to test the com- 
peting doctrines by their effects. The Spirit of God 
had put His seal on the Apostle’s teaching, and on 
the faith of his hearers. Did any such manifestation 
accompany the preaching of the Legalist? That is all 
he wants to know. His cause must stand or fall by 
“the demonstration of the Spirit.” By “signs and 
wonders,” and diverse gifts of the Holy Spirit, God 
was wont to “bear witness with” the ministers and 
witnesses of Jesus Christ (Heb. ii. 3, 4; 1 Cor. xii. 
4—I1): was this testimony on the side of Paul, or the 
Circumcisionists ? Did it sustain the gospel of the grace 
of God, or the “ other gospel” of Legalism ? 

“ He, the Spirit of truth, shall testify of Me,” Christ. 
had said; and so John, at the end of the Apostolic age: 
“Tt is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the 
Spirit is truth.” When the Galatians accepted the 
message of the cross proclaimed by Paul's lips, “ the 
Holy Spirit fell” on them, as on the Jewish Church at 


iii. 1-5.) THE GALATIAN FOLLY. 171 


the Pentecost, and the Gentile believers in the house 
of Cornelius (Acts x. 44) ; ‘‘the love of God was poured 
out in their hearts through the Holy Ghost that was 
given them” (Rom v. 5). As a mighty, rushing wind 
this supernatural influence swept through their souls. 
Like fire from heaven it kindled in their spirit, con- 
suming their lusts and vanities, and fusing their nature 
into a new, holy passion of love to Christ and to God 
the Father. It broke from their lips in ecstatic cries, 
unknown to human speech; or moved them to unutter- 
able groans and pangs of intercession (Rom. viii. 26). 
There were men in the Galatian Churches on whom 
the baptism of the Spirit conferred besides miraculous 
charismata, superhuman powers of insight and of heal- 
ing. These gifts God continued to ‘minister amongst” 
them (God is unquestionably the agent in ver. 5). Paul 
asks them to observe on what conditions, and to whom, 
these extraordinary gifts are distributed. For the “ re- 
ceiving of the Spirit” was an infallible sign of true 
Christian faith. This was the very proof which in the 
first instance had convinced Peter and the Judean 
Church that it was God's will to save the Gentiles, 
independently of the Mosaic law (Acts xi. 15—18). 
Receiving the Spirit, the Galatian believers knew 
that they were the sons of God. ‘God sent forth the 
Spirit of His Son into their hearts, crying, Abba, Father” 
(ch. iv. 6, 7). When Paul speaks of “ receiving the 
Spirit,” it is this that he thinks of most of all. The 
_ miraculous phenomena attending His visitations were 
facts of vast importance ; and their occurrence is one 
of the historical certainties of the Apostolic age. They 
were ‘‘signs,” conspicuous, impressive, indispensable 
at the time—monuments set up for all time. But they 
were in their nature variable and temporary. There 


172 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





are powers greater and more enduring than these. 
The things that “ abide” are “faith, hope, love;” love 
chiefest of the three. Hence when the Apostle in a 
later chapter enumerates the qualities that go to make 
up ‘‘the fruit of the Spirit,” he says nothing of tongues 
or prophecies, or gifts of healing; he begins with Jove. 
Wonder-working powers had their times and seasons, 
their peculiar organs ;. but every believer in Christ— 
whether Jew or Greek, primitive or medizeval or modern 
Christian, the heir of sixty generations of faith or the 
latest convert from heathenism—joins in the testimony, 
“The love of God is shed abroad in our heart by 
the Holy Ghost given unto us.” This mark of God's 
indwelling Spirit the Galatians had possessed. They 
were “sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus” 
(ch. iii. 26). And with the filial title they had re- 
ceived the filial nature. They were “taught of God to 
love one another.” Being sons of God in Christ, they 
were also “heirs” (ch. iv. 7; Rom viii. 17). They 
possessed the earnest of the heavenly inheritance 
(Eph. i. 14), the pledge of their bodily redemption 
(Rom. viii. 10—23), and of eternal life in the fellowship 
of Christ. In their initial experience of ‘‘ the salvation 
which is in Jesus Christ” they had the foretaste of its 
“eternal glory,” of the ‘‘ grace” belonging to “ them that 
love our Lord Jesus Christ,” which is “ in incorruption.” * 

No legal condition was laid down at this beginning 
of their Christian life; no “ work” of any kind inter- 
posed between the belief of the heart and the conscious 
reception of the new life in Christ. Even their baptism, 
significant and memorable as it was, had not been 
required as in itself a precondition of salvation. Some- 





*2 Tim. ii. 10; Eph. vi. 24 (df@apcia is incorruption everywhere 
else in Paul: why not here ?) 


ili. 1-5.J THE GALATIAN FOLLY, 173 








times after baptism, but often—as in the case of 
Cornelius’ household—before the rite was admin- 
istered, ‘the Holy Ghost fell” on believing souls 
(Acts x. 44—48; xi. 15, 16). They “confessed with 
their mouth the Lord Jesus;” they “ believed in their 
hearts that God had raised Him from the dead,”—and 
they were saved. Baptism is, as Paul’s teaching else- 
where shows,* the expression, not the medium—the 
symbol, and not the cause, of the new birth which it 
might precede or follow. The Catholic doctrine of 
the opus operatum in the sacraments is radically anti- 
Pauline ; it is Judaism over again. The process by 
which the Galatians became Christians was essentially 
spiritual. They had begun 7 the Spirit. 

And so they must continue. To begin in the Spirit, 
and then look for perfection to the flesh, to suppose 
that the work of faith and love was to be consummated 
by Pharisaic ordinances, that Moses could lead them 
higher than Christ, and circumcision effect for them 
what the power of the Holy Ghost failed to do—this 
was the height of unreason. “ Are you so senseless ?” 
the Apostle asks. 

He dwells on this absurdity, pressing home his 
expostulation with an emphasis that shows he is 
touching the centre of the controversy between himself 
and the Judaizers. They admitted, as we have shown 
in Chapter [X., that Gentiles might enter the kingdom 
of God through faith and by the baptism of the Spirit. 
This was settled at the Council of Jerusalem. Without 
a formal acceptance of this evangelical principle, we do 
not see how the Legalists could again have found en- 
trance into Gentile Christian Churches, much less have 





= Che 1 26, 27; Rom, vi. 2—4; Col. ii. 11—13; Tit. iii. 5, 


174 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


carricd Peter and Barnabas and the liberal Jews of 
Ant’och with them, as they did. They no longer at- 
tempted to deny salvation to the uncircumcised ; but 
they claimed for the circumcised a more complete 
salvation, and a higher status in the Church. “ Yes, 
Paul has laid the foundation,” they would say; “ now 
we have come to perfect his work, to give you the more 
advanced instruction, derived from the fountain-head 
of Christian knowledge, from the first Apostles in 
Jerusalem. Jf you would be perfect, keep the command- 
ments ; be circumcised, like Christ and His disciples, 
and observe the law of Moses. If you be circumcised, 
Christ will profit you much more than hitherto; and 
you will inherit all the blessings promised in Him to 
the children of Abraham.” 

Such was the style of “persuasion” employed by 
the Judaizers. It was well calculated to deceive Jewish 
believers, even those best affected to their Gentile 
brethren. It appeared to maintain the prescriptive 
rights of Judaism and to satisfy legitimate national 
pride, without excluding the Gentiles from the fold of 
Christ. Nor is it difficult to understand the spell which 
the circumcisionist doctrine exerted over susceptible 
Gentile minds, after some years of Christian training, 
of familiarity with the Old Testament and the early 
history of Israel. Who is there that does not feel the 
charm of ancient memories and illustrious names? 
Many a noble mind is at this present time ‘‘ bewitched,” 
many a gifted and pious spirit is ‘“‘carried away” by 
influences precisely similar. Afostolical succession, pa- 
tristic usage, catholic tradition, the authority of the Church 
—what words of power are these! How wilful and 
arbitrary it appears to rely upon any present expe- 
rience of the grace of God, upon one’s own reading 





iii. 1-5.] THE GALATIAN FOLLY. 175 


of the gospel of Christ, in contradiction to claims ad- 
vanced under the patronage of so many revered and 
time-honoured names. The man, or the community, 
must be deeply conscious of having “received the 
Spirit,” that can feel the force of attractions of this 
nature, and yet withstand them. It requires a c'ear 
view of the cross of Jesus Christ, an absolute faith in 
the supremacy of spiritual principles, to enable one to 
resist the fascinations of ceremonialism and tradition. 
They offer us a more “ornate worship,” a more “ re- 
fined” type of piety, “consecrated by antiquity ;” they 
invite us to enter a selecter circle, and to place ourselves 
on a higher level than that of the vulgar religionism of 
faith and feeling. It is the Galatian “ persuasion” over 
again. Ceremony, antiquity, ecclesiastical authority are 
after all poor substitutes for faith and love. If they 
come between us and the living Christ, if they limit and 
dishonour the work of His Spirit, we have a right to 
say, and we will say with the Apostle Paul, Away with 
them ! 

The men of tradition are well content that we should 
“begin in the Spirit,” provided they may have the 
finishing of our faith, To prey upon the Pauline 
Churches is their ancient and natural habit. An evan- 
gelical beginning is too often followed by a ritualistic 
ending. And Paul is ever begetting spiritual children, 
to see himself robbed of them by these bewitching 
Judaizers. ‘O foolish Galatians,” he seems still to be 
saying, What is it that charms you so much in all this 
ritual and externalism ? Does it bring* you nearer to 
the cross of Christ? Does it give you more of His 
Spirit? Is it a spiritual satisfaction that you find in 
these works of Church law, these priestly ordinances 
and performances ? How can the sons of God return 


176 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


to such childish rudiments ? Why should a religion 
which began so spiritually seek its perfection by means 
so formal and mechanical ? 

The conflict which this Epistle signalised is one 
that has never ceased. Its elements belong to human 
nature. It is the contest between the religion of the 
Spirit and that of the letter, between the spontaneity 
of personal faith and the rights of usage and pre- 
scription. The history of the Church is largely the 
record of this incessant struggle. In every Christian 
community, in every earnest and devout spirit, it is 
repeated in some new phase. When the Fathers of the 
Church in the second and third centuries began to write 
about “the new law” and to identify the Christian 
ministry with the Aaronic priesthood, it was evident 
that Legalism was regaining its ascendancy. Already 
the foundations were laid of the Catholic Church- 
system, which culminated in the Papacy of Rome. 
What Paul’s opponents sought to do by means of 
circumcision and Jewish prerogatives, that the Catholic 
legalists have done, on a larger scale, through the 
claims of the priesthood and the sacramental offices. 
The spiritual functions of the private Christian, one 
after another, were usurped or carelessly abandoned. 
Step by step the hierarchy interposed itself between 
Christ and His people’s souls, till its mediation became 
the sole channel and organ of the Holy: Spirit's influ- 
ence. So it has come to pass, by a strange irony of 
history, that under the forms of Pauline doctrine and 
in the name of the Apostle of the Gentiles joined with 
that of Peter, catholic Christendom, delivered by him 
from the Jewish yoke, has been entangled in a bond- 
age in some respects even heavier and more repres- 
sive. If tradition and prescription are to regulate our 





iii. 1-5.] THE GALATIAN FOLLY. 177 





Christian belief, they lead us infallibly to Rome, as 
they would have lead the Galatians to perishing Jeru- 
salem. 

III. Paul said he had but one question to ask his 
readers, that which we have already discussed. And 
yet he does put to them, by way of parenthesis, 
another (ver. 4), suggested by what he has already called 
to mind, touching the beginning of their Christian 
course: ‘“‘ Have ye suffered so many things in vain ?” 
Their folly was the greater in that 7 threatened to deprive 
them of the fruit of their past sufferings in the cause of 
Christ. 

The Apostle does not say this without a touch of 
softened feeling. Remembering the trials these Galatians 
had formerly endured, the sacrifices they had made in 
accepting the gospel, he cannot bear to think of their 
apostasy. Hope breaks through his fear, grief passes 
into tenderness as he adds, “If it be indeed in vain.” 
The link of reminiscence connecting vv. 3 and 4 is the 
same as that we find in 1 Thess. i. 6: “ Ye received 
the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy 
Ghost.” * 

We need not seek for any peculiar cause of these 
sufferings ; nor wonder that the Apostle does not 
mention them elsewhere. Every infant Church had 
its baptism of persecution. No one could come out 
of heathen society and espouse the cause of Jesus, 
without making himself a mark for ridicule and violence, 
without the rupture of family and public ties, and many 
painful sacrifices. The hatred of Paul’s fellow-country- 
men towards him was an additional cause of persecu- 
tion to the Churches he had founded. They were 
* Comp. 2 Thess. i. 4—6 ; Ph. i. 28—30; Rom. viii. 17; 2 Tim. i. 8 

12 





178 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
followers of the crucified Nazarene, of the apostate 
Saul. And they had to suffer for it. With the joy of 
their new life in Christ, there had come sharp pangs of 
loss and grief, heart-wounds deep and lasting. This 
slight allusion sufficiently reminds the Apostle’s readers 
of what they had passed through at the time of their 
conversion. 

And now were they going to surrender the faith won 
by such a struggle ? Would they let themselves be 
cheated of blessings which had cost them so dear? 
“ So many things,” he asks, “did you suffer in vain ?” 
He will not believe it. He cannot think that this brave 
beginning will have so mean an ending. If “God 
counts them worthy of His kingdom for which they 
suffered,” let them not deem themselves unworthy. 
Surely they have not escaped from the tyranny of 
heathenism, in order to yield up their liberties to 
Jewish intrigue, to the cozenage of false brethren who 
seek to exalt themselves at their expense (ch. ii. 4; 
iv. 17; vi. 12, 13). Will flattery beguile from them 
the treasure to which persecution had made them cling 
the more closely ? 

Too often, alas, the Galatian defection is repeated. 
The generous devotion of youth is followed by the 
lethargy and formalism of a prosperous age; and the 
man who at twenty-five was a pattern of godly zeal, 
at fifty is a finished worldling. The Christ whom he 
adored, the cross at which he bowed in those early 
days—he seldom thinks of them now. ‘I remember 
thee, the kindness of thy youth, the love of thine espousals; 
how thou wentest after Me im the wilderness.” Success 
has spoiled him. The world’s glamour has bewitched 
him. He hids fair to “ end in the flesh.” 

In a broader sense, the Apostle’s question addresses 


iif. 1-5.] THE GALATIAN FOLLY. 179 





itself to Churches and communities untrue to the 
spiritual principles that gave them birth. The faith 
of the primitive Church, that endured three centuries 
of persecution, yielded its purity to Imperial blandish- 
ments. Our fathers, Puritan and Scottish, staked their 
lives for the crown-rights of Jesus Christ and the 
freedom of faith. Through generations they endured 
social and civil ostracism in the cause of religious 
liberty. And now that the battle is won, there are 
those amongst their children who scarcely care to know 
what the struggle was about. Out of indolence of 
mind or vanity of scepticism, they abandon at the 
bidding of priest or sophist the spiritual heritage 
bequeathed to them. Did ¢hey then suffer so many 
things in vain? Was it an illusion that sustained 
those heroic souls, and enabled them to “stop the 
mouths of lions and subdue kingdoms” ? Was it for 
nought that so many of Christ’s witnesses in these 
realms since the Reformation days have suffered the 
loss of all things rather than yield by subjection to 
a usurping and worldly priesthood? And can we, 
reaping the fruit of their faith and courage, afford in 
these altered times to dispense with the principles whose 
maintenance cost our forefathers so dear a price ? 

“O foolish Galatians,” Paul in that case might well 
say to us again! 


CHAPTER XII. 
ABRAHAM'S BLESSING AND THE LAW'S CURSE. 


“Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for 
righteousness. Know therefore that they which be of faith, the same 
are sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God justifieth 
the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham, 
saying, In thee shall all the nations be blessed. So then they which be 
of faith are blessed with the faithful Abraham. For as many as are of 
the works of the law are under a curse: for it is written, Cursed is every 
one which continueth not in all things that are written in the book of 
the law, todo them. Now that no man is justified in the law in the 
sight of God, is evident: for, The righteous shall live by faith ; and the 
law is not of faith ; but, He that doeth them shall live in them. Christ 
redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us: 
for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree : that upon 
the Gentiles might come the blessing of Abraham in Christ Jesus ; that 
we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith."—GAL, iii. 
6—14. 


| AITH then, we have learnt, not works of law, was 
the condition on which the Galatians received the 
Spirit of Christ. By this gate they entered the Church 
of God, and had come into possession of the spiritual 
blessings common to all Christian believers, and of those 
extraordinary gifts of grace which marked the Apostolic 
days. 

In this mode of salvation, the Apostle goes on to 
show, there was after all nothing new. The righteous- 
ness of faith is more ancient than -legalism. It is as 
old as Abraham. His religion rested on this ground. 


iii. 6-14.] ABRAHAM'S BLESSING. 181 


“The promise of the Spirit,” held by him in trust for 
the world, was given to his faith. ‘“ You received the 
Spirit, God works in you His marvellous powers, by 
the hearing of faith—even as Abraham believed God, 
and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.” In the 
hoary patriarchal days as now, in the time of promise 
as of fulfilment, faith is the root of religion; grace 
invites, righteousness waits upon the hearing of faith. 
So Paul ‘declares in vv. 6—-9, and re-affirms with 
emphasis in ver. 14. The intervening sentences set 
forth by contrast the curse that hangs over the man 
‘who seeks salvation by way of law and personal merit. 

Thus the two: standing types of religion, the two 
ways by which men seek salvation, are put in contrast 
with each other—faith with its blessing, law with its 
curse. The former is the path on which the Galatians 
had entered, under the guidance of Paul; the latter, 
that to which the Judaic teachers were leading them. 
So far the two principles stand only in antagonism. 
The antinomy will be resolved in the latter part of the 
chapter. 

But why does Paul make so much of the faith of 
Abraham? Not only because it furnished him with a 
telling illustration, or because the words of Gen. xv. 6 
supplied a decisive proof-text for his doctrine: he 
could not well have chosen any other ground, Abra- 
ham’s case was the zustantia probans in this debate. ‘‘We 
are Abraham’s seed :”* this was the proud conscious- 
ness that swelled every Jewish breast. ‘ Abraham’s 
bosom” was the Israelite’s heaven: even in Hades his 
guilty sons could claim pity from “ Father Abraham” 
(Luke xvi. 19—31). In the use of this title was con- 


* Matt. iii. 9 ; John viii. 33—59. 


182 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


centrated all the theocratic pride and national bigotry 
of the Jewish race. To the example of Abraham the 
Judaistic teacher would not fail to appeal. He would tell 
the Galatians how the patriarch was called, like them- 
selves, out of the heathen world to the knowledge of the 
true God; how he was separated from his Gentil 
kindred, and received the mark of circumcision to be 
worn thenceforth by all who followed in his steps, and 
who sought the fulfilment of the promise granted to 
Abraham and his seed. 

The Apostle holds, as strongly as any Judaist, that 
the promise belongs to the children of Abraham. But 
what makes a son of Abraham? “ Birth, true Jewish 
blood, of course,” replied the Judaist. The Gentile, in 
his view, could only come into a share of the heritage 
by receiving circumcision, the mark of legal adoption 
and incorporation. Paul answers this question by 
raising another. What was it that brought Abraham 
his blessing? To what did he owe his righteousness ? 
It was faith: so Scripture declares—“ Abraham be- 
lieved God.” Righteousness, covenant, promise, bless- 
ing—all turned upon this. And the true sons of 
Abraham are those who are like him: “Know then 
that the men of faith, these are Abraham’s sons.” This 
declaration is a blow, launched with studied effect full 
in the face of Jewish privilege. Only a Pharisee, only 
a Rabbi, knew how to wound in this fashion. Like the 
words of Stephen’s defence, such sentences as these 
stung Judaic pride to the quick. No wonder that his 
fellow-countrymen, in their fierce fanaticism of race, 
pursued Paul with burning hate and set a mark upon 
his life. 

But the identity of Abraham’s blessing with that 
enjoyed by Gentile Christians is not left to rest on mere 


iii. 6-14.] ABRAHAM'S BLESSING. 183 


inference and analogy of principle. Another quotation 
clinches the argument: “In thee,” God promised to 
the patriarch, ‘shall be blessed ”—not the natural seed, 
not the circumcised alone—but “all the nations 
(Gentiles)”!* And “the Scripture” said this, “ fore- 
seeing” what is now taking place, namely, “that God 
justifieth the Gentiles by faith.” So that in giving 
this promise to Abraham it gave him his “‘ gospel before 
the time (zrpoevyyyeXicato).” Good news indeed it was 
to the noble patriarch, that all the nations—of whom 
as a wide traveller he knew so much, and over whose 
condition he doubtless grieved—were finally to be 
blessed with the light of faith and the knowledge of the 
true God; and thus blessed through himself. In this 
prospect he “rejoiced to see Christ's day ;” nay, the 
Saviour tells us, like Moses and Elijah, “he saw it and 
was glad.” Up to this’ point in Abraham’s history, as 
Paul’s readers would observe, there was no mention 
of circumcision or legal requirement (ver. 17; Rom. iv. 
Q—13). It was on purely evangelical principles, by 
a declaration of God’s grace listened to in thankful 
faith, that he had received the promise which linked 
him to the universal Church and entitled every true 
believer to call him father. ‘‘So that the men of faith 
are blessed, along with faithful Abraham.” 

I, What then, we ask, was the nature of Abraham's 
blessing ? In its essence, it was righteousness. The 
“blessing of vv. 9 and 14 is synonymous with the  justi- 
fication” of vv. 6 and 8, embracing with it all its fruits 


* Gen. xii. 3 : the first promise to Abraham. In this text the Hebrew 
and the Greek (LXX) say, A// the tribes (families) of the earth. The 
synonymous é4vy, with its special Jewish connotation, suited Paul’s 
purpose better; and it is used in the repetition of the promise in Gen 
xviii. 18, 





184 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





and consequences. No higher benediction could come 
to any man than that God should “count him right- 
eous.” 

Paul and the Legalists agreed in designating righteous- 
ness before God man’s chief good. But they and he 
intended different things by it. Nay, Paul’s conception 
of righteousness, it is said, differed radically from that 
of the Old Testament, and even of his companion writers 
in the New Testament. Confessedly, his doctrine 
presents this idea under a peculiar aspect. But there 
is a spiritual identity, a common basis of truth, in all 
the Biblical teaching on this vital subject. Abraham's 
righteousness was the state of a man who trustfully 
accepts God’s word of grace, and is thereby set right 
with God, and put in the way of being and doing right 
thenceforward. In virtue of his faith, God regarded 
and dealt with Abraham as arighteous man. Righteous- 
ness of character springs out of righteousness of stand- 
ing. God makes a man righteous by counting him so! 
This is the Divine paradox of Justification by Faith. 
When the Hebrew author says, ‘‘God counted it to 
him for righteousness,” he does not mean im leu of 
righteousness, as though faith were a substitute for a 
righteousness not forthcoming and now rendered 
superfluous ; but so as to amount to righteousness, with a 
view to righteousness. This “reckoning” is the sovereign 
act of the Creator, who gives what He demands, ‘ who 
maketh alive the dead, and calleth the things that are 
not as though they were” (Rom. iv. 17—22). He sees 
the fruit in the germ. 

There is nothing arbitrary, or merely forensic in this 
imputation. Faith is, for such a being as man, the 
spring of all righteousness before God, the one act of 
the soul which is primarily and supremely right. What 


iii, 6-14.] ABRAHAM’S BLESSING. 185 


is more just than that the creature should trust his 
Creator, the child his Father? Here is the root of all 
right understanding and right relations between men 
and God—that which gives God, so to speak, a moral 
hold upon us. And by this trust of the heart, yielding 
itself in the ‘obedience of faith” to its Lord and 
Redeemer, it comes into communion with all those 
energies and purposes in Him which make for 
righteousness. Hence from first to last, alike in the 
earlier and later stages of revelation, man’s righteous- 
ness is “not his own;” it is “the righteousness that 
is of God, based upon faith” (Phil. iii. 9). Faith 
unites us to the source of righteousness, from which 
unbelief severs us. So that Paul’s teaching leads us 
to the fountain-head, while other Biblical teachers for 
the most part guide us along the course of the same 
Divine righteousness for man. His doctrine is required 
by theirs; their doctrine is implied, and indeed more 
than once expressly stated, in his.* 

The Old Testament deals with the materials of 
character, with the qualities and behaviour constituting 
a righteous man, more than with the cause or process 
that makes him righteous. All the more significant 
therefore are such pronouncements as that of Gen. xv. 6, 
and the saying of Hab. ii. 4, Paul’s other leading quota- 
tion on this subject. This second reference, taken from 
the times of Israel’s declension, a thousand years and 
more after Abraham, gives proof of the vitality of the 
righteousness of faith. The haughty, sensual Chaldean 
is master of the earth. Kingdom after kingdom he 
has trampled down. Judah lies at his mercy, and has 
no mercy to expect. But the prophet looks beyond the 


* Rom. viii. 4; 1 Cor. vii 9; Eph, v, 9; Tit. ii, 12—14 ; ete, 


186 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 

sterm and ruin of the time. “Art Thou not fron 
everlasting, my God, my Holy One? Weshall not die” 
(Hab. i. 12). The faith of Abraham lives in his breast. 
The people in whom that faith is cannot die. While 
empires fall, and races are swept away in the flood of 
conquest, ‘‘ The just shall live by his faith.”* If faith 
is seen here at a different point from that given before, 
it is still the same faith of Abraham, the grasp of the 
soul upon the Divine word—+there first evoked, here 
steadfastly maintained, there and here the one ground 
of righteousness, and therefore of life, for man or for 
people. Habakkuk and the “remnant” of his day 
were “ blessed with faithful Abraham ;” how blessed, 
his splendid prophecy shows. Righteousness is of 
faith ; life of righteousness: this is the doctrine of Paul, 
witnessed to by law and prophets. 

Into what a life of blessing the righteousness of faith 
introduced “ faithful Abraham,” these Galatian students 
of the Old Testament very well knew. Twicef is he 
designated “the friend of God.” The Arabs still call 
him el khalil,—the friend. His image has impressed 
itself with singular force on the Oriental mind. He 
is the noblest figure of the Old Testament, surpassing 
Isaac in force, Jacob in purity, and both in dignity of 
character, The man to whom God said, “ Fear not, 
Abraham: I am thy shield and thy exceeding great 
reward ;” and again, ‘“‘I am God Almighty; walk 
before me, and be thou perfect:” on how lofty a plat- 
form of spiritual eminence was he set! The scene of 


* Of faith qualifies dive in the Hebrew of the prophet, and in the 
LXX, also in the quotation of Heb. x. 38. The presumption is that 
it does so in Kom. i. 17, and Gal. iii. 11. We can see no sufficient 
reason in these passages to the contrary. 

{ 2 Chron, xx. 7; Isai. xli. 8 ; comp. Jas. ii. 23, 


iii, 6-14.] ABRAHAM’S BLESSING. 187 


Gen. xviii. throws into striking relief the greatness of 
Abraham, the greatness of our human nature in him; 
when the Lord says, “Shall I hide from Abraham the 
thing that Ido?” and allows him to make his bold inter- 
cession for the guilty cities of the Plain. Even the trial 
to which the patriarch was subjected in the sacrifice of 
Isaac, was a singular honour, done to one whose faith 
was ‘“‘counted worthy to endure” this unexampled strain. 
His religion exhibits an heroic strength and firmness, 
but at the same time a large-hearted, genial humanity, 
an elevation and serenity of mind, to which the temper 
of those who boasted themselves his children was 
utterly opposed. Father of the Jewish race, Abraham 
was no Jew. He stands before us in the morning light 
of revelation a simple, noble, archaic type of man, true 
“father of many nations.” And his faith was the secret 
of the greatness which has commanded for him the 
reverence of four thousand years. His trust in God ~ 
made him worthy to receive so immense a trust for the 
future of mankind. 

With Abraham’s faith, the Gentiles inherit his bless- 
ing. They were not simply blessed 7” him, through his 
faith which received and handed down the blessing,— 
but blessed wth him. Their righteousness rests on the 
same principle as his. Religion reverts to its earlier, 
purer type. Just as in the Epistle to the Hebrews 
Melchizedek’s priesthood is adduced as belonging to 
amore Christlike order, antecedent to and underlying 
the Aaronic; so we find here, beneath the cumbrous 
structure of legalism, the evidence of a primitive 
religious life, cast in a larger mould, with a happier 
style of experience, a piety broader, freer, at once more 
spiritual and more human. Reading the story of Abra- 
ham, we witness the bright dawn of faith, its spring- 


188 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS,. 


time of promise and of hope. These morning hours 
passed away ; and the sacred history shuts us in to the 
hard school of Mosaism, with its isolation, its mechani- 
cal routine and ritual drapery, its yoke of legal exaction 
ever growing more burdensome. Of all this the Church 
of Christ was to know nothing. It was called to enter 
into the labours of the legal centuries, without the need 
of sharing their burdens. In the “ Father of the faithful” 
and the “ Friend of God” Gentile believers were to see 
their exemplar, to find the warrant for that sufficiency 
and freedom of faith of which the natural children of 
Abraham unjustly strove to rob them. 

II. But if the Galatians are resolved to be under the 
Law, they must understand what this means. The 
legal state, Paul declares, instead of the blessing of 
Abraham, brings with it a curse: “ As many as are of 
law-works, are under a curse.” 

This the Apostle, in other words, had told Peter at 
Antioch. He maintained that whoever sets up the law as 
a ground of salvation, ‘“‘ makes himself a transgressor” 
(ch. ii. 18); he brings upon himself the misei 7 of having 
violated law. This is no doubtful contingency. The 
law in explicit terms pronounces its curse against every 
man who, binding himself to keep it, yet breaks it in 
any particular. 

The Scripture which Paul quotes to this effect, forms 
the conclusion of the commination uttered by the people 
of Israel, according to the directions of Moses, from 
Mount Ebal, on their entrance into Canaan: “ Cursed 
is every one that continueth not in all things written 
in the book of the law to do them.” * How terribly 








* Deut. xxvii. 26; Jos. viii. 32—35. <A// things. given by the LXX 
in the former passage, is wanting in the Hebrew. But the phrase is trae 
to the spirit of this text, and is read in the parallel Deut. xxviii. 15. 


iii, 6-14.] THE LAW’S CURSE. 189 


had that imprecation been fulfilled! They had in truth 
pledged themselves to the impossible. The Law had 
not been kept—could not be kept on merely legal 
principles, by man or nation. The confessions of the 
Old Testament, already cited in ch. ii. 16, were proof 
of this. That no one had “continued in all things 
written in the law to do them,” goes without saying. 
If Gentile Christians adopt the law of Moses, they must 
be prepared to render an obedience complete and un- 
faltering in every detail (ch. v. 3)—or have this curse 
hanging perpetually above their heads. They will bring 
on themselves the very condemnation which was lying 
so heavily upon the conscience of Israel after the 
flesh. 

This sequence of law and transgression belonged to 
Paul’s deepest convictions. ‘The law,” he says, 
“‘worketh out wrath” (Rom. iv. 14, 15). This is an 
axiom of Paulinism. Human nature being what it is, 
law means transgression ; and the law being what it is, 
transgression means Divine anger and the curse (see p. 
143). The law is just ; the penalty is necessary. The 
conscience of the ancient people of God compelled them 
to pronounce the imprecation dictated by Moses. The 
same thing occurs every day, and under the most varied 
moral conditions. Every man who knows what is right 
and will not do it, execrates himself. The consciousness 
of transgression is a clinging, inward curse, a witness 
of ill-desert, foreboding punishment. The law of con- 
science, like that of Ebal and Gerizim, admits of no 
exceptions, no intermission. In the majesty of its 
unbending sternness it can only be satisfied by our 
continuing in all things that it prescribes. Every 
instance of failure, attended with whatever excuse or 
condonation, leaves upon us its mark of self-reproach. 


190 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





And this inward condemnation, this consciousness of 
guilt latent in the human breast, is not self-condemna- 
tion alone, not a merely subjective state ; but it proceeds 
from God's present judgement on the man. It is the 
shadow of His just displeasure. 

What Paul here proves from Scripture, bitter expe- 
rience had taught him. As the law unfolded itself to 
his youthful conscience, he approved it as “holy and 
just and good.” He was pledged and resolved te 
observe it in every point. He must despise himself 
if he acted otherwise. He strove to be—in the sight 
of men indeed he was—“ touching the righteousness 
which is in the law, blameless.” If ever a mam carried 
out to the letter the legal requirements, and fulfilled the 
moralist’s ideal, it was Saul of Tarsus. Yet his failure 
was complete, desperate! While men accounted him a 
paragon of virtue, he loathed himself; he knew that 
before God his righteousness was worthless. The 
“Jaw of sin in his members” defied “the law of his 
reason,” and made its power the more sensible the 
more it was repressed. The curse thundered by the 
six tribes from Ebal resounded in his ears. And there 
was no escape. The grasp of the law was relentless, 
because it was just, like the grasp of death. Against 
all that was holiest in it the evil in himself stood up in 
stark, immitigable opposition. ‘O wretched man that 
I am,” groans the proud Pharisee, “ who shall deliver 
me!” From this curse Christ had redeemed a 
And he would not, if he could help it, have the Galatians 
expose themselves to it again. On legal principles, 
there is no safety but in absolute, flawless obedience, 
such as no man ever has rendered, or ever will. Let 
them trust the experience of centuries of Jewish 


bondage. 


iii, 6-14.] THE LAW’S CURSE. 191 


Verses II, I2 support the assertion that the Law 
issues in condemnation, by a further, negative proof. 
The argument is a syllogism, both whose premises are 
drawn from the Old Testament. It may be formally 
stated thus. Mayor premise (evangelical maxim) : “The 
just man lives of faith” * (ver.11). Minor: The man of 
law does not live of faith (for he lives by doing: legal 
maxim, ver. 12).f £7go: The man of law is not just 
before God (ver. 11). While therefore the Scripture 
by its afore-cited commination closes the door of life 
against righteousness of works, that door is opened to 
the men of faith. The two principles are logical con- 
tradictories. To grant righteousness to faith is to 
deny it to legal works. This assumption furnishes our 
minor premise in ver, 12. The legal axiomis, ‘He that 
doeth them shall live in them:” that is to say, The law 
gives life for doing—not therefore for believing ; we get 
no sort of legal credit for that. The two ways have 
different starting-points, as they lead to opposite goals. 
From faith one marches, through God’s righteousness, 
to blessing ; from works, through self-righteousness, to 
the curse. 

The two paths now lie before us—the Pauline and 
the legal method of salvation, the Abrahamic and the 
Mosaic scheme of religion. According to the latter, 
one begins by keeping so many rules—ethical, cere- 
monial, or what not; and after doing this, one expects 
to be counted righteous by God. According to the 
former, the man begins by an act of self-surrendering 
trust in God’s word of grace, and God already reckons 
him just on that account, without his pretending to 
anything in the way of merit for himself. In short, 





* Hab. ii. 4. For the construction, see 7o/e on p. 186, 
¢ Lev. xviii. 5. 


192 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





the Legalist tries to make God believe in him: Abraham 
and Paul are content fo believe in God. They do not 
set themselves over against God, with a righteousness 
of their own which He is bound to recognise; they 
commit themselves to God, that He may work out His 
righteousness in them. Along this path lies blessing— 
peace of heart, fellowship with God, moral strength, 
life in its fulness, depth, and permanence. From this 
source Paul derives all that was noblest in the Church 
of the Old Covenant. And he puts the calm, grand 
image of Father Abraham before us for our pattern, 
in contrast with the narrow, painful, bitter spirit of 
Jewish legalism, inwardly self-condemned. 

III. But how pass from this curse to that blessing ? 
How escape from the nemesis of the broken law into 
the freedom of Abraham’s faith? To this question ver. 
13 makes answer: “ Christ bought us out of the curse 
of the law, having become a curse for us.” Chrisfs 
redemption changes the curse into a blessing. 

We entered this Epistle under the shadow of the 
cross. It has been all along the centre of the writer’s 
thought. He has found in it the solution of the 
terrible problem forced upon him by the law. Law 
had led him to Christ’s cross; laid him in Christ's 
grave; and there left him, to rise with Christ a new, 
free man, living henceforth to God (ch. ii. 19—21). 
So we understand the purpose and the issue of the 
death of Jesus Christ; now we must look more 
narrowly at the fact itself. 

“‘Christ became a curse!” Verily the Apostle was 
not “seeking to please or persuade men.” This 
expression throws the scandal of the cross into the 
strongest relief. Far from veiling it or apologizing for 
it, Paul accentuates this offence. His experience taught 


iii. 6-14.) THE LAW'S CURSE. 193 
him that Jewish pride must be compelled to reckon with 
it. No, he would not have “the offence of the cross 
abolished” (ch. v. I1). 

And did not Christ become a curse? Could the fact 
be denied by any Jew? His death was that of the 
most abandoned criminals. By the combined verdict of 
Jew and Gentile, of civil and religious authority, 
endorsed by the voice of the populace, He was pro- 
nounced a malefactor and blasphemer. But this was 
not all. The hatred and injustice of men are hard 
to bear; yet many a sensitive man has borne them in 
a worthy cause without shrinking. It was a darker 
dread, an infliction far more crushing, that compelled 
the cry, ‘‘My God, why hast Thou forsaken Me!” 
Against the maledictions of men Jesus might surely 
at the worst have counted on the Father’s good 
pleasure. But even that failed Him. There fell upon 
His soul the death of death, the very curse of sin— 
abandonment by God! Men “did esteem Him”—and for 
the moment He esteemed Himself—“ smitten of God.” 
He hung there abhorred of men, forsaken of His God ; 
earth all hate, heaven all blackness to His view. Are 
the Apostle’s words too strong? Delivering up His 
Son to pass through this baptism, God did in truth 
make Him a curse for us. By His “ determinate 
counsel” the Almighty set Jesus Christ in the place of 
condemned sinners, and allowed the curse of this 
wicked world to claim Him for its victim. 

The death that befell Him was chosen as if for the 
purpose of declaring Him accursed. The Jewish people 
have thus stigmatized Him. They made the Roman 
magistrate and the heathen soldiery their instrument in 
gibbeting their Messiah. ‘Shall I crucify your King ?” 
said Pilate. ‘“ Yes,” they answered, “ crucify Him!” 


13 


ae 
7 
Yo 


194 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS. 





Their rulers thought to lay on the hated Nazarene an 
everlasting curse. Was it not written, “A curse of 
God is every one that hangeth on a tree?”* This 
saying attached in the Jewish mind a peculiar loath- 
ing to the person of the dead thus exposed. Once 
crucified, the name of Jesus would surely perish from 
the lips of men; no Jew would hereafter dare to pro- 
fess faith in Him. His cause could never surmount 
this ignominy. In later times the bitterest epithet that 
Jewish scorn could fling against our Saviour (God 
forgive them !), was just this word of Deuteronomy, 
hattaliiy—the hangéd one. 

This sentence of execration, with its shame freshly 
smarting, Paul has seized and twined into a crown of 
glory. “ Hanged on a tree, crushed with reproach— 
accursed, you say, He was, my Lord, my Saviour! It 
is true. But the curse He bore was ours. His death, 
unmerited by Him, was our ransom-price, endured to 
buy us out of our curse of sin and death.” This is 
the doctrine of the vicarious sacrifice. In speaking of 
“ransom” and ‘‘ redemption,” using the terms of the 
market, Christ and His Apostles are applying human 
language to things in their essence unutterable, things 
which we define in their effects rather than in them- 
selves. ‘We know, we prophesy, in part.” We 
know that we were condemned by God’s holy law; 
that Christ, Himself sinless, came under the law’s curse, 
and taking the place of sinners, “ became sin for us ;” 





* The Hebrew of Deut. xxi. 23 reads ‘‘a curse of God ;” the LXX, 
“cursed dy God” (kexarapnuévos however, not émixardparos as 
in Paul’s phrase). The Apostle omits the two last words, not inadver- 
tently, as Meyer supposes, for he must have had a painfully vivid 
remembrance of the wording of the original, but out of a reverence that 
made it impossible to speak of the Redeemer as “accursed by God.” 


iii. 6-14.] THE LAWS CURSE. 195 


and that His interposition has brought us out of con- 
demnation into blessing and peace. How can we con- 
ceive the matter otherwise than as it is put in His 
own words: He “gave Himself a ransom—The Good 
Shepherd giveth His life for the sheep?” He suffers 
in our room and stead ; He bears inflictions incurred by 
our sins, and due to ourselves ; He does this at the 
Divine Will, and under the Divine Law: what is this 
but to “buy us out,” to pay the price which frees us 
from the prison-house of death ? 


“Christ redeemed us,” says the Apostle, thinking 
questionless of himself and his Jewish kindred, on 
whom the law weighed so heavily. His redemption 
was offered “to the Jew first.” But not to the Jew 
alone, nor asa Jew. The time of release had come for 
all men. “ Abraham’s blessing” long withheld, was 
now to be imparted, as it had been promised, to “all 
the tribes of the earth.” In the removal of the legal 
curse, God comes near to men as in the ancient days. 
His love is shed abroad; His spirit of sonship dwells 
in human hearts. In Christ Jesus crucified, risen, 
reigning—a new world comes into being, which re- 
stores and surpasses the promise of the old, 


CHAPTER XIII. 
THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 


* Brethren, I speak after the manner of men: Though it be but a 
an’s testament, yet when it hath been confirmed, no one maketh it 
void, or addeth thereto. Now to Abraham were the promises spoken, 
and to his seed. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many, but as of one, 
And to thy seed, which is Christ. Now this I say; A testament con- 
firmed beforehand by God, the law, which came four hundred and 
thirty years after, doth not disannul, so as to make the promise of none 
effect. For if the inheritance is of the law, it is no more of promise: 
but God hath granted it to Abraham by promise.”—GAL. iii. 15—18. 


ENTILE Christians, Paul has shown, are already 

J sons of Abraham. Their faith proves their 
descent from the father of the faithful. The redemp- 
tion of Christ has expiated the law's curse, and brought 
to its fulfilment the primeval promise. It has conferred 
on Jew and Gentile alike the gift of the Holy Spirit, 
sealing the Divine inheritance. ‘‘ Abraham’s blessing” 
has ‘‘come upon the Gentiles in Christ Jesus.” What 
can Judaism do for them more? Except, in sooth, to 
bring them under its inevitable curse. 

But here the Judaist might interpose: “ Granting 
so much as this, allowing that God covenanted with 
Abraham on terms of faith, and that believing Gentiles 
are entitled to his blessing, did not God make a second 
covenant with Moses, promising further blessings upon 





iii. 15-18] 2HE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 197 


terms of law? If the one covenant remains valid, why 
not the other? From the school of Abraham the 
Gentiles must pass on to the school of Moses.” This 
inference might appear to follow, by parity of reasoning, 
from what the Apostle has just advanced. And it 
accords with the position which the legalistic opposition 
had now taken up. The people of the circumcision, 
they argued, retained within the Church of Christ their 
peculiar calling; and Gentiles, if they would be perfect 
Christians, must accept the covenant-token and the 
unchangeable ordinances of Israel. Faith is but the 
first step in the new life; the discipline of the law will 
bring it to completion. Release from the curse of the 
Jaw, they might contend, leaves its obligations still 
binding, its ordinances unrepealed. Christ ‘came not 
to destroy, but to fulfil.” 

So we are brought to the question of the relation 
of law and promtse, which is the theoretical, as that of 
Gentile to Jewish Christianity is the practical problem 
of the Epistle. The remainder of the chapter is occu- 
pied with its discussion. This section is the special 
contribution of the Epistle to Christian theology—a 
contribution weighty enough of itself to give to it a fore- 
most place amongst the documents of Revelation. Paul 
has written nothing more masterly. The breadth and 
subtlety of his reason, his grasp of the spiritual realities 
underlying the facts of history, are conspicuously 
manifest in these paragraphs, despite the extreme 
difficulty and obscurity of certain sentences. 

This part of the Epistle is in fact a piece of inspired 
historical criticism, it is a magnificent reconstruction of 
the course of sacred history. It is Paul's theory of 
doctrinal development, condensing into a few pregnant 
sentences the rationale of Judaism, explaining the 


198 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








method of God's dealings with mankind from Abraham 
down to Christ, and fitting the legal system into its 
place in this order with an exactness and consistency 
that supply an effectual verification of the hypothesis. 
To such a height has the Apostle been raised, so com- 
pletely is he emancipated from the fetters of Jewish 
thought, that the whole Mosaic economy becomes to 
his mind no more than an interlude, a passing stage in 
the march of Revelation. 

This passage finds its. counterpart in Romans xi. 
Here the past, there the future fortunes of Israel are 
set forth. Together the two chapters form a Jewish 
theodicy, a vindication of God’s treatment of the chosen 
people from first to last. Rom. v. 12—21 and 1 Cor. 
xv. 20—57 supply a wider exposition, on the same 
principles, of the fortunes of mankind at large. The 
human mind has conceived nothing more splendid and 
yet sober, more humbling and exalting, than the view 
of man’s history and destiny thus sketched out. 


The Apostle seeks to establish, in the first place, the 
fixedness of the Abrahamic covenant. This is the main 
purport of the passage. At the same time, in ver. 16, 
he brings into view the Object of the covenant, the 
person designated by it—Chvis/, its proper Heir. This 
consideration, though stated here parenthetically, lies 
at the basis of the settlement made with Abraham ; its 
importance is made manifest by the after course of 
Paul’s exposition. 

At this point, where the discussion opens out into its 
larger proportions, we observe that the sharp tone of 
personal feeling with which the chapter commenced has 
disappeared. In ver. 15 the writer drops into a concilia- 
tory key. He seems to forget the wounded Apostle in 


iii, 15-18] THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. | 199 








the theologian and instructor in Christ. ‘“ Brethren,” he 
says, “I speak in human fashion—I put this matter in 
a way that every one will understand.” He lifts himself 
above the Galatian quarrel, and from the height of his 
argument addresses himself to the common intelligence 
of mankind. 

But is it covenant, or testament, that the Apostle 
intends here? “I speak after the manner of men,” 
he continues ; “if the case were that of a man’s d:a6x«n, 
once ratified, no one would set it aside, or add toit.” The 
presumption is that the word is employed in its accepted, 
every-day significance. And that unquestionably was 
“testament.” It would never occur to an ordinary 
Greek reader to interpret the expression otherwise. 
Philo and Josephus, the representatives of contemporary 
Hellenistic usage, read this term, in the Old Testament, 
with the connotation of 8a@,jcn in current Greek.* The 
context of this passage is in harmony with their 
usage. The “covenant” of ver. 15 corresponds to “the 
blessing of Abraham,” and “the promise of the Spirit ” 
in the two preceding verses. Again in ver. 17, 
‘‘promise”” and ‘‘covenant” are synonymous. Now 
a “covenant of promise” amounts to a ‘“ testament.” 
It is the prospective nature of the covenant, the bond 
which it creates between Abraham and the Gentiles, 
which’ the Apostle has been insisting on ever since 
ver. 6. It belongs “to Abraham and to his seed” ; 
it comes by way of “ gift” and “grace” (vv. 18, 
22); it invests those taking part in it with “son- 
ship” and rights of “ inheritance” (vv. 18, 26, 29, 
etc.) These ideas cluster round the thought of @ 
testament ; they are not inherent in covenant, strictly 


* See the able and convincing elucidation of dia@j«n in Cremer’s 
Biblico- Theological Lexicon of N.T. Greek. 


200 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





considered. Even in the Old Testament this latter 
designation fails to convey all that belongs to the 
Divine engagements there recorded. In a covenant 
the two parties are conceived as equals in point of law, 
binding themselves by a compact that bears on each 
alike. Here it is not so. The disposition of affairs 
is made by God, who in the sovereignty of His grace 
“hath granted it to Abraham.” It was surely a reve- 
rent sense of this difference which dictated to the men 
of the Septuagint the use of d:a0y«n rather than cvvOyK«n, 
the ordinary term for covenant or compact, in their 
rendering of the Hebrew Jberith. 

This aspect of the covenants now becomes their 
commanding feature. Our Lord’s employment of this 
word at the Last Supper gave it the affecting reference 
to His death which it has conveyed ever since to the 
Christian mind.* The Latin translators were guided by 
a true instinct when in the Scriptures of the New Cove- 
nant they wrote ¢estamentum everywhere, not fedus or 
pactum, for this word. The testament is a covenant— 
and something more. The testator designates his heir, 
and binds himself to grant to him at the predetermined 
time (ch. iv. 2) the specified boon, which it remains 
for the beneficiary simply to accept. Such a Divine 
testament has come down from Abraham to his Gentile 
sons. 

I. Now when a man has made a testament, and it 
has been ratified—“ proved,” as we should say—# 
stands govd for ever. No one has afterwards any power 





* See Heb. ix. 16—18, where so much ingenuity has been expended 
to turn fes/ament into covenant, 


Sweet is the memory of His name, 
Who blessed us in His will. 





lii, 15-18.] THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 201 








to set it aside, or to attach to it a new codicil, modifying 
its previous terms. There it stands—a document com- 
plete and unchangeable (ver. 15). 

Such a testament God gave “to Abraham and his 
seed.” It was “ratified” (or “confirmeé”) by the 
final attestation made to the patriarch after the 
supreme trial of his faith in the sacrifice of Isaac: 
“By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, that in 
blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying multiply 
thy seed as the stars of heaven; . . . and in thy seed 
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.”* In 
human testaments the ratification takes place through 
another; but God ‘having no greater,” yet “to show 
to the heirs of the promise the immutability of His 
counsel” confirmed it by His own oath. Nothing was 
wanting to mark the Abrahamic covenant with an 
indelible character, and to show that it expressed an 
unalterable purpose in the mind of God. 

With such Divine asseveration “were the promises 
spoken to Abraham, and sis seed.” This last word 
diverts the Apostle’s thoughts for a moment, and he 
gives a side-glance at the person thus designated in the 
terms of the promise. Then he returns to his former 
statement, urging it home against the Legalists: “ Now 
this is what I mean: a testament previously ratified by 
God, the Law which dates four hundred and thirty years 
later cannot annul, so as to abrogate the Promise” (ver. 
17). The bearing of Paul’s argument is now perfectly 
clear. He is using the promise to Abraham to over- 
throw the supremacy of the Mosaic law. The Promise 
was, he says, the prior settlement. No subsequent 
transaction could invalidate it or disqualify those 


* Gen. xxii. 816—1; Heb. vi. 17, 


202 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


entitled under it to receive the inheritance. That 
testament lies at the foundation of the sacred history. 
The Jew least of all could deny this. How could such 
an instrument be set aside? Or what right has any 
one to limit it by stipulations of a later date ? 

When a man amongst ourselves bequeaths his pro- 
perty, and his will is publicly attested, its directions are 
scrupulously observed ; to tamper with them is a crime. 
Shall we have less respect to this Divine settlement, 
this venerable charter of human salvation? You say, 
The Law of Moses has its rights : it must be taken into 
account as wellas the Promise to Abraham. True; but 
it has no power to cancel or restrict the Promise, older 
by four centuries and a half. The later must be 
adjusted to the earlier dispensation, the Law interpreted 
by the Promise. God has not made fwo testaments— 
the one solemnly committed to the faith and hope of 
mankind, only to be retracted and substituted by some- 
thing of a different stamp. He could not thus stultify 
Himself. And we must not apply the Mosaic enact- 
ments, addressed to a single people, in such a way as 
to neutralise the original provisions made for the race 
at large. Our human instincts of good faith, our 
reverence for public compacts and established rights, 
forbid our allowing the Law of Moses to trench upon 
the inheritance assured to mankind in the Covenant 
of Abraham. 

This contradiction necessarily arises if the Law is 
put on a level with the Promise. To read the Law as 
a continuation of the older instrument is virtually to 
efface the latter, to “‘ make the promise of none effect.” 
The two institutes proceed on opposite principles. “ If 
the inheritance is of law, it is no longer of promise” 
(ver. 18). Law prescribes certain things to be done, 


F 
ie 
S| 


iii, 15-18.] THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 203 


and guarantees a corresponding reward—so much pay 
for so much work. That, in its proper place, is an 
excellent principle. But the promise stands on another 
footing : ‘‘God hath bestowed it on Abraham by way of 
grace” (keydpiotat,” ver. 18). It holds out a blessing 
conferred by the Promiser’s good will, to be conveyed 
at the right time without demanding anything more 
from the recipient than faith, which is just the will to 
receive. So God dealt with Abraham, centuries before 
any one had dreamed of the Mosaic system of law. 
God appeared to Abraham in His sovereign grace ; 
Abraham met that grace with faith. So the Covenant 
was formed. And so it abides, clear of all legal con- 
ditions and claims of human merit, an “ everlasting 
covenant” (Gen. xvii. 7; Heb. xiii. 20). 

Its permanence is emphasized by the /ense of the 
verb relating to it. The Greek perfect describes settled 
facts, actions or events that carry with them finality. 
Accordingly we read in vv. 15 and 17 of “a ratified 
covenant ”—one that stands ratified. In ver. 18, ‘God 
hath granted it to Abraham”—a grace never to be 
recalled. Again (ver. 19), “the seed to whom the 
promise hath been made”-—once for all. A perfect 
participle is used of the Law in ver. 17 (yeyoves), for 
it is a fact of abiding significance that it was so much 
later than the Promise ; and in ver. 24, ‘‘ the Law hath 
been our tutor,”—its work in that respect is an endur- 
ing benefit. Otherwise, the verbs relating to Mosaism 
in this context are past in tense, describing what is 
now matter of history, a course of events that has come 
and gone. Meanwhile the Promise remains, an im- 
movable certainty, a settlement never to be disturbed. 
The emphatic position of o @eds (ver. 18), at the very 
end of the paragraph, serves to heighten this effect, 


204 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





“It is God that hath bestowed this grace on Abraham.” 
There is achallenge in the word, as though Paul asked, 
“Who shall make it void ?” * 

Paul’s chronology in ver. 17 has been called in 
question. We are not much concerned to defend it. 
Whether Abraham preceded Moses by four hundred and 
thirty years, as the Septuagint and the Samaritan text 
of Exod. xii. 40, 41 affirm, and as Paul’s contemporaries 
commonly supposed ; or whether, as it stands in the 
Hebrew text of Exodus, this was the length of time 
covered by the sojourn in Egypt, so that the entire period 
would be about half as long again, is a problem that 
Old Testament historians must settle for themselves ; it 
need not trouble the reader of Paul. The shorter period 
is amply sufficient for his purpose. If any one had said, 
“No, Paul; you are mistaken. It was six hundred and 
thirty, not four hundred and thirty years from Abraham 
to Moses ;” he would have accepted the correction with 
the greatest goodwill. He might have replied, “So 
much the better for my argument.”f It is possible to 
“strain out” the “gnats” of Biblical criticism, and yet 
to swallow huge “camels” of improbability. 

II. Ver. 16 remains for our consideration. In prov- 
ing the steadfastness of the covenant with Abraham, 
the Apostle at the same time directs our attention to 
the Person designated by it, to whom its fulfilment was 
guaranteed. ‘‘To Abraham were the promises spoken, 
and to his seed—‘ to thy seed,’ which is Christ.” 


* Comp. Rom. viii. 33, 34; Acts xi. 17; 2 Cor. i. 21, for a similar 
emphasis. 

+ We gain nothing, and we may lose much, in ‘‘trying to settle 
questions of Old Testament historical criticism by casual allusions in 
the New Testament.” (See Mr. Beet’s sensible observations, in his Com- 
mentary ad /oc.) 





iii. 15-18.] THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 205 


This identification the Judaist would not question. 
He made no doubt that the Messiah was the legatee 
of the testament, “the seed to whom it hath been 
promised.” Whatever partial and germinant fulfilments 
the Promise had received, it is on Christ in chief that 
the inheritance of Israel devolves. In its true and full 
intent, this promise, like all predictions of the triumph of 
God’s kingdom, was understood to be waiting for His 
advent. 

The fact that this Promise looked to Christ, lends 
additional force to the Apostle’s assertion of its indeli- 
bility. The words “unto Christ,” which were inserted 
in the text of ver. 17 at an early time, are a correct 
gloss. The covenant did not lie between God and 
Abraham alone. It embraced Abraham’s descendants 
in their unity, culminating in Christ. It looked down 
the stream of time to the last ages. Abraham was its 
starting-point ; Christ its goal. ‘‘To thee—and to thy 
seed :” these words span the gulf of two thousand years, 
and overarch the Mosaic dispensation. So that the 
covenant vouchsafed to Abraham placed him, even at 
_ that distance of time, in close personal relationship with 
the Saviour of mankind. No wonder that it was so 
evangelical in its terms, and brought the patriarch an 
experience of religion which anticipated the privileges of 
Christian faith. God’s covenant with Abraham, being 
in effect His covenant with mankind in Christ, stands 
both first and last. The Mosaic economy holds a second 
and subsidiary place in the scheme of Revelation. 

The reason the Apostle gives for reading Christ 
into the promise is certainly peculiar. He has been 
taxed with false exegesis, with ‘rabbinical hair- 
splitting” and the like. Here, it is said, is a fine 
example of the art, familiar to theologians, of torturing 


» 


206 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





out of a word a predetermined sense, foreign to its 
original meaning. ‘He doth not say, and to seéds, as 
referring to many ; but as referring to one, and to thy 
seed, which is Christ.” Paul appears to infer from the 
fact that the word “seed” is grammatically singular, 
and not plural, that it designates a single individual, 
who can be no other than Christ. On the surface this 
does, admittedly, look like a verbal quibble. The 
word “seed,” in Hebrew and Greek as in English, is 
not used, and could not in ordinary speech be used 
in the plural to denote a number of descendants. It is 
a collective singular. The plural applies only to 
different kinds of seed. The Apostle, we may presume, 
was quite as well aware of this as his critics. It does 
not need philological research or grammatical acumen 
to establish a distinction obvious to common sense, 
This piece of word-play is in reality the vehicle of an 
historical argument, as unimpeachable as it is important. 
Abraham was taught, by a series of lessons,* to refer 
the promise to the single line of Isaac. Paul else- 
where lays great stress on this consideration; he 
brings Isaac into close analogy with Christ; for he 
was the child of faith, and represented in his birth a 
spiritual principle and the communication of a super- 
natural life.t The true seed of Abraham was in the 
first instance ove,not many. In the primary realisation 
of the Promise, typical of its final accomplishment, it 
received a singular interpretation; it concentrated it- 
self on the one, spiritual offspring, putting aside the 
many, natural and heterogeneous (Hagarite or Keturite) 
descendants. And this sifting principle, this law of 


* Gen. xii. 2, 3 } xv. 2—63 xvii. 4—8, 15—21; xxii. 16—18 
t Ch. iv, 21—31 ; Rom. iv, 17—22; comp. Heb, xi, £1, 12, 


iii. 15-18.) HE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 207 


election which singles out from the varieties of nature 
the Divine type, comes into play all along the line 
of descent, as in the case of Jacob, and of David. It 
finds its supreme expression in the person of Christ. 
The Abrahamic testament devolved under a law of 
Spiritual selection. By its very nature it pointed 
ultimately to Jesus Christ. When Paul writes “ Not 
to seeds, as of many,” he virtually says that the word of 
inspiration was singular in sense as weli as in form; 
in the mind of the Promiser, and in the interpretation 
given to it by events, it bore an individual reference, 
and was never intended to apply to Abraham’s 
descendants at large, to the many and miscellaneous 
“ children according to flesh.” 

Paul’s interpretation of the Promise has abundant 
analogies. All great principles of human history tend to 
embody themselves in some “ chosen seed.” They find 
at last their true heir, the ove man destined to be their 
fulfilment. Moses, David, Paul; Socrates and Alexan- 
der ; Shakespere, Newton, are examples of this. The 
work that such men do belongs to themselves. Had 
any promise assured the world of the gifts to be 
bestowed through them, in each case one might have 
said beforehand, It will have to be, ‘‘ Not as of many, 
but as of one.” It is not multitudes, but men that rule 
the world. “ By one man sin entered into the world: 
we shall reign in life through the one Jesus Christ.” 
From the first words of hope given to the repentant 
pair banished from Eden, down to the latest predictions 
of the Coming One, the Promise became at every 
stage more determinate and individualising. The 
finger of prophecy pointed with increasing distinctness, 
now from this side, now from that, to the veiled form 
of the Chosen of God—“ the seed of the woman,” the 


208 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


‘‘seed of Abraham,” the “ star out of Jacob,” the “ Son of 
David,” the “ King Messiah,” the suffering “ Servant of 
the Lord,” the “smitten Shepherd,” the “Son of man, 
coming in the clouds of heaven.” In His person all the 
lines of promise and preparation meet; the scattered 
rays of Divine light are brought to a focus. And the 
desire of all nations, groping, half-articulate, unites 
with the inspired foresight of the seers of Israel to 
find its goal in Jesus Christ. There was but One who 
could meet the manifold conditions created by the 
world’s previcus history, and furnish the key to the 
mysteries and contradictions which had gathered round 
the path of Revelation. 

Notwithstanding, the Promise had and has a generic 
application, attending its personal accomplishment, 
“Salvation is of the Jews.” Christ belongs “to the 
Jew first.” Israel was raised up and consecrated to 
be the trustee of the Promise given to the world 
through Abraham. The vocation of this gifted race, 
the secret of its indestructible vitality, lies in its 
relationship to Jesus Christ. They are ‘‘His own,” 
though they “received Him not.” Apart from Him, 
Israel is nothing to the world—nothing but a witness 
against itself. Premising its essential fulfilment in 
Christ, Paul still reserves for his own people their 
peculiar share in the Testament of Abraham—not a 
place of exclusive privilege, but of richer honour and 
larger influence. ‘“ Hath God cast away His people ?” 
he asks: ‘‘ Nay indeed. For I also am an Israelite, of 
the seed of Abraham.” So that, after all, it is some- 
thing to be of Abraham’s children by nature. Despite 
his hostility to Judaism, the Apostle claims for the 
Jewish race a special cffice in the dispensation of the 
Gospel, in the working out of God’s ultimate designs 





iii, 15-18.] THE COVENANT OF PROMISE. 20g 


for mankind.* Would they only accept their Messiah, 
how exalted a rank amongst the nations awaits them! 
The title “seed of Abraham” with Paul, like the 
“Servant of Jehovah” in Isaiah, has a double signifi- 
cance. The sufferings of the elect people made them in 
their national character a pathetic type of the great Suf- 
ferer and Servant of the Lord, His supreme Elect. In 
Jesus Christ the collective destiny of Israel is attained ; 
its prophetic ideal, the spiritual conception of its calling, 
is realised,—“‘ the seed to whom it hath been promised.” 


Paul is not alone in his insistence on the relation 
of Christ to Abraham. It is announced in the first 
sentence of the New Testament: “the book of the 
generation of Jesus Christ, sox of Abraham, son of 
David.” And it is set forth with singular beauty in 
the Gospel of the Infancy. Mary’s song and Zacharias’ 
prophecy recall the freedom and simplicity of an 
inspiration long silenced, as they tell how “the Lord 
hath visited and redeemed His people; He hath shown 
mercy to our fathers, in remembrance of His holy 
covenant, the oath which He sware unto Abraham our 
father.” And again, “He hath helped Israel His 
servant in remembrance of His mercy, as He spake 
to our fathers, to Abraham and to his seed for ever.”t 
These pious and tender souls who watched over the 
cradle of our Lord and stood in the dawning of His 
new day, instinctively cast their thoughts back to the 
Covenant of Abraham. In it they found matter for 
their songs and a warrant for their hopes, such as 
no ritual ordinances could furnish. Their utterances 
breathe a spontaneity of faith, a vernal freshness of 


* Rom. xi, Luke i. 54, 55, 68—73- 
14 


210 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


joy and hope to which the Jewish people for ages had 
been strangers. The dull constraint and stiffness, the 
harsh fanaticism of the Hebrew nature, have fallen 
from them. They have put on the beautiful garments 
of Zion, her ancient robes of praise. For the time of 
the Promise draws near. Abraham’s Seed is now 
to be born; and Abraham's faith revives to meet 
Him. It breaks forth anew out of the dry and 
long-barren soil of Judaism ; it is raised up to a richer 
and an enduring life. Paul’s doctrine of Grace does 
but translate into logic the poetry of Mary’s and 
Zacharias’ anthems. The Testament of Abraham 
supplies their common theme. 


4 





CHAPTER XIV. 
THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 


“* What then is the law? It was added because of transgressions, till 
the seed should come to whom the promise hath been made; and it 
was ordained through angels by the. hand of a mediator. Now a 
mediator is not @ mediator of one; but God is one. Is the law then 
against the promises of God? God forbid : for if there had beena law 
given which could make alive, verily righteousness would have been of 
the law. Howbeit the Scripture hath shut up all things under sin, that 
the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to them that 
believe. But before faith came, we were kept in ward under the law, 
shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed. So that 
the law hath been our tutor /o dring us unto Christ, that we might be 
justified by faith.”—GAL. iii. 19g—24. 


HAT then ts the law? So the Jew might well 
exclaim. Paul has been doing nothing but dis- 
parage it.—“ You say that the Law of Moses brings no 
righteousness or blessing, but only a curse ; that the 
covenant made with Abraham ignores it, and does not 
admit of being in any way qualified by its provisions. 
What then do you make of it? Is it not God’s voice 
that we hear in its commands? Have the sons of 
Abraham ever since Moses’ day been wandering from 
“the true path of faith?” Such inferences might be 
drawn, not unnaturally, from the Apostle’s denunciation 
of Legalism. They were actually drawn by Marcion 
in the second century, in his extreme hostility to 
Judaism and the Old Testament. 


212 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





This question must indeed have early forced itself 
upon Paul’s mind. How could the doctrine of Salvation 
by Faith and the supremacy of the Abrahamic Covenant 
be reconciled with the Divine commission of Moses? 
How, on the other hand, could the displacement of the 
Law by the Gospel be justified, if the former too was 
authorised and inspired by God? Can the same God 
have given to men these two contrasted revelations of 
Himself? The answer, contained in the passage before 
us, is that the two revelations had different ends in 
view. They are complementary, not competing insti- 
tutes. Of the two, the Covenant of Promise has the 
prior right; it points immediately to Christ. The 
Legal economy is ancillary thereto; it never professed 
to accomplish the work of grace, as the Judaists would 
have it do. Its office was external, but nevertheless 
accessory to that of the Premise. It guarded and 
schooled the infant heirs of Abraham’s Testament, until 
the time of its falling due, when they should be prepared 
in the manhood of faith to enter on their inheritance. 
“The law hath been our tutor for Christ, with the 
intent we should be justified by faith” (ver. 24). 

This aspect of the Law, under which, instead of 
’ being an obstacle to the life of faith, it is seen to 
subserve it, has been suggested already. “For I,” the 
Apostle said, “through law died to law” (ch. ii 19). 
The Law first impelled him to Christ. It constrained 
him to look beyond itself. Its discipline was a pre- 
paration for faith. Paul reverses the relation in which 
Faith and Law were set by the Judaists. They brought 
in the Law to perfect the unfinished work of faith 
(ver. 3): he made it preliminary and propzedeutic. 
What they gave out for more advanced doctrine, he 
treats as the ‘‘ weak rudiments,” belonging to the infancy 





4 


—" 


iti. 19-24.) THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 213 


of the sons of God (ch. iv. I—11). Up to this point, 
however, the Mosaic law has been considered chiefly 
in a negative way, as a foil to the Covenant of grace. 
The Apostle has now to treat of its nature more 
positively and explicitly, first indeed 2” contrast with the 
promise (vv. 19, 20); and secondly, zm tts co-operation 
with the pronuse (vv. 22—24). Ver. 21 is the transition 
from the first to the second of these conceptions. 

I. “For the sake of the transgressions (committed 
against it) * the law was added.” The Promise, let us 
remember, was complete in itself. Its testament of 
grace was sealed and delivered ages before the Mosaic 
legislation, which could not therefore retract or modify 
it. The Law was “superadded,” as something over 
and above, attached to the former revelation for a 
subsidiary purpose lying outside the proper scope of 
the Promise. What then was this purpose ? 

1. For the sake of transgressions. In other words, 
the object of the law of Moses was to develope sin, 
This is not the whole of the Apostle’s answer; but 
it is the key to his explanation. This design of the 
Mosaic revelation determined its form and character. 
Here is the standpoint from which we are to estimate 
its working, and its relation to the kingdom of grace. 
The saying of Rom. v. 20 is Paul’s commentary upon 
this sentence: ‘‘ The law came in by the way, in order 
that the trespass (of Adam) might multiply.” The same 
necessity is expressed in the paradox of I Cor. xv. 56: 
“The strength of sin is the law.” 

This enigma, as a psychological question, is resolved 
by the Apostle in Rom. vii. 13—24. The law acts as 
a spur and provocative, rousing the power of sin to 








* Tév wapaBdacew : the definite article can scarcely mean less than 
this. 


214 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS., 





conscious activity. However good in itself, coming 
into contact with man’s evil flesh, its promulgation is 
followed inevitably by transgression. Its commands 
are so many occasions for sin to come into action, 
to exhibit and confirm its power. So that the Law 
practically assumes the same relation to sin as that 
in which the Promise stands to righteousness and life. 
In its union with the Law our sinful nature perpetually 
“brings forth fruit unto death.” And this mournful 
result God certainly contemplated when He gave the 
Law of Moses. 

But are we compelled to put so harsh a sense on the 
Apostle’s words? May we not say that the Law was 
imposed in order to restrain sin, to keep it within 
bounds? Some excellent interpreters read the verse 
in this way. It is quite true that, in respect of public 
morals and the outward manifestations of evil, the 
Jewish law acted beneficially, as a bridle upon the 
sinful passions. But this is beside the mark. The 
Apostle is thinking only of inward righteousness, that 
which avails before God. The wording of the clause 
altogether excludes the milder interpretation. For the 
sake of (ydpw, Latin gratia) signifies promotion, not 
prevention. And the word éransgression, by its Pauline 
and Jewish usage, compels us to this view.* Trans- 
gression presupposes law. It is the specific form which 
sin takes under law—the re-action of sin against law. 
What was before a latent tendency, a bias of disposition, 
now Starts to light as a flagrant, guilty fact. By bring- 
ing about repeated transgressions the Law reveals the 
true nature of sin, so that it “becomes exceeding 
sinful.” It does not make matters worse ; but it shows 


* Comp. the reference to this word in Chapter IX., p. 143. 





iii. 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 215 





how bad they really are. It aggravates the disease, in 
order to bring it toa crisis. And this is a necessary 
step towards the cure. 

2. The Law of Moses was therefore @ provisional 
dispensation,—“ added until the seed should come to 
whom the promise hath been made.” Its object was 
to make itself superfluous. It “is not made for a 
righteous man; but for the lawless and unruly” (1 
Tim. i. 9). Like the discipline and drill of a strictly 
governed boyhood, it was calculated to produce a 
certain effect on the moral nature, after the attainment 
_ of which it was no longer needed and its continuance 
would be injurious. The essential part of this effect 
lay, however, not so much in the outward regularity it 
imposed, as in the inner repugnancy excited by it, the 
consciousness of sin unsubdued and defiant. By its 
operation on the conscience the Law taught man his 
need of redemption. It thus prepared the platform for 
the work of Grace. The Promise had been given. The 
coming of the Covenant-heir was assured. But its fulfil- 
ment was far off. ‘The Lord is not slack concerning 
His promise,”—and yet it was two thousand years 
before “ Abraham's seed” came to birth. The degen- 
eracy of the patriarch’s children in the third and fourth 
generation showed how little the earlier heirs of the 
Promise were capable of receiving it. A thousand 
years later, when the Covenant was renewed with 
David, the ancient predictions seemed at last nearing 
their fulfilment. But no; the times were still unripe ; 
the human conscience but half-disciplined. The bright 
dawn of the Davidic monarchy was overclouded. The 
legal yoke is made more burdensome; sore chastise- 
ments fall on the chosen people, marked out for suffering 
as well as honour. Prophecy has many lessons yet to 


216 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS. 





inculcate. The world’s education for Christ has another 
millennium to run, 

Nor when He came, did “ the Son of man find faith 
in the earth”! The people of the Law had no sooner 
seen than they hated ‘‘Him to whom the law and 
the prophets gave witness.” Yet, strangely enough, 
the very manner of their rejection showed how 
complete was the preparation for His coming. Two 
features, rarely united, marked the ethical condition of 
the Jewish people at this time—an intense moral con- 
sciousness, and a deep moral perversion ; reverence for 
the Divine law, combined with an alienation from its 
spirit. The chapter of Paul’s autobiography to which 
we have so often referred (Rom. vii. 7—24) is typical 
of the better mind of Judaism. It is the we plus ultra 
of self-condemnation. The consciousness of sin in 
mankind has ripened. 

3. And further, the Law of Moses revealed God's 
will in a veiled and accommodated fashion, while the 
Promise and the Gospel are its direct emanations. 
This is the inference which we draw from vv. 19, 20. 

We are well aware of the extreme difficulty of 
this passage. Ver. 20 has received, it is computed, 
some four hundred and thirty distinct interpretations. 
Of all the “hard things our beloved brother Paul” 
has written, this is the very hardest. The words 
which make up the sentence are simple and familiar ; 
and yet in their combination most enigmatic. And 
it stands in the midst of a paragraph among the 
most interesting and important that the Apostle ever 
wrote. 

Let us look first at the latter clause of ver. 19: 
“ ordained through angels, in the hand (#.e. by means) 
of a mediator.” These circumstances, as the orthodox 





ui. 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 2i7 





Jew supposed, exhanced the glory of the Law. The 
pomp and formality under which Mosaism was ushered 
in, the presence of the angelic host to whose agency 
the terrific manifestations attending the Law-giving were 
referred, impressed the popular mind with a sense of 
the incomparable sacredness of the Sinaitic revelation. 
It was this assumption which gave its force to the 
climax of Stephen’s speech, of which we hear an echo 
in these words of Paul: ‘‘ who received the law at the 
disposition of angels—and have not kept it!” * The 
simplicity and informality of the Divine communion 
with Abraham, and again of Christ’s appearance in the 
world and His intercourse with men, afford a striking 
contrast to all this. 

More is hinted than is expressly said in Scripture 
of the part taken by the angels in the Law-giving. 
Deut. xxxili. 2f and Ps. Ixviii. 17 give the most 
definite indications of the ancient faith of Israel on this 
point. But “the Angel of the Lord” is a familiar 
figure of Old Testament revelation. In Hebrew thought 
impressive physical phenomena were commonly asso- 
ciated with the presence of spiritual agents. The 
language of Heb. i. 7 and ii. 2 endorses this belief, 
which in no way conflicts with natural science, and is 
in keeping with the Christian faith. 

But while such intermediacy, from the Jewish stand- 
point, increased the splendour and authority of the 
Law, believers in Christ had learned to look at the 

* Acts vii. 53: comp. diarayas dyyéAwy and diarayels Oe ayyédwv. 
Stephen's last words may well have lingered in the ear of Saul. From 
the lips of Stephen, they were something of an argumentum ad hominem. 

+ A doubtful citation at the best: the reading of the LXX is more to 
the point than the Hebrew text. 


t See the quotations frora Jewish writers to this effect given by 
Meyer or Lightfoot. 





218 THE EPISTLE TO 711E GALATIANS. 


matter otherwise.* A_ revelation “ administered 
through angels,” spoke to them of a God distant and 
obscured, of a people unfit for access to His presence. 
This is plainly intimated in the added clause, “by. 
means of a mediator,” —a title commonly given to Moses, . 
and recalling the entreaty of Exod xx. 19; Deut. v. 22— 
28: “ The people said, Speak thou with us, and we will 
hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die.” ; 
These are the words of sinful men, receiving a law | 
given, as the Apostle has just declared, on purpose to | 
convict them of their sins. The form of the Mosaic | 
revelation tended therefore in reality not to exalt the 
Law, but to exhibit its difference from the Promise and 
the distance at which it placed men from God. 

The same thought is expressed, as Bishop Lightfoot 
aptly shows, by the figure of “ the veil on Moses’ face,” 
which Paul employs with so much felicity in 2 Cor, 
iii. 13—18. In the external glory of the Sinaitic law- 
giving, as on the illuminated face of the Law-giver, — 
there was a fading brightness, a visible lustre con- 
cealing its imperfect and transitory character. The 
theophanies of the Old Covenant were a magnificent 
veil, hiding while they revealed. Under the Law, 
angels, Moses came between God and man. It was 
God who in His own grace conveyed the promise to 
justified Abraham (ver. 18). 


E 
7 
5 
‘ 


* Comp. Heb. ii. 2—4; also Col. ii. 15 : “ (sez?. God) having stripped 
off the principalities and powers ”—the earlier forms of angelic media- 
tion. The writer may refer on this latter passage to his note in the 
Fulpit Commentary, also to The Expositor, Ist series, x. 403—42I. 

+ But the title ‘“‘ mediator” belongs to Christ, given by Paul him- 
self—the ‘‘one mediator between God and men, the man Christ 
Jesus” (1 Tim. ii. 5). (Comp. Heb. viii. 6; ix. 15; xii. 24.) Christ 
is so styled however under an aspect very different from that in which 
the word appears here. ‘‘ There is one mediator,”’ the Apostle writes 


iii. 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 219 





The Law employed a mediator ; the Promise did not 
(ver. 19.). With this contrast in our minds we ap- 
proach ver. 20. On the other side of it (ver. 21), we find 
Law and Promise again in sharp antithesis. The same 
antithesis runs through the intervening sentence. The 
two clauses of ver. 20 belong to the Law and Promise 
respectively. ‘ Now a mediator is not of one :” that is 
an axiom which holds good of the Law. ‘‘ But God is 
one:” this glorious truth, the first article of Israel's 
creed, applies to the Promise. Where “a mediator” 
is necessary, unity is wanting,—not simply in a 
numerical, but in a moral sense, as matter of feeling 
and of aim. There are separate interests, discordant 
views to be consulted. This was true of Mosaism. 
Although in substance “holy and just and good,” it 
was by no means purely Divine. It was not the abso- 
lute religion. Not only was it defective; it contained, 
in the judgement of Christ, positive elements of wrong, 
precepts given “‘ for the hardness of men’s hearts.”* It 
largely consisted of “carnal ordinances, imposed till 
the time of rectification” (Heb. ix. 10). The theocratic 
legislation of the Pentateuch is lacking in the unity 
and consistency of a perfect revelation. Its disclosures 
of God were refracted in a manifest degree by the 
atmosphere through which they passed. 

“But God is one.” Here again the unity is moral 


in t Timothy, ‘who gave Himself a ransom for all,” the one atoning 
mediator. But Christ’s manifestation of God was direct, as that of 
Moses was not. His Person does not come between men and God, 
like that of the Sinaitic mediator ; it brings God into immediate contact 
with men. Moses acted for a distant God: Christ is Immanuel, God 
with us. On the Auman side Christ is mediator (dvO@pwros Xpicrds 
"Inoods) ; He acts for individual men with God. On the Divine side, 
He is more than mediator, being God Himself. 
* Matt. xix. 8. Comp. Ezek. xx. 25. 


220 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


and essential—of character and action, rather than of 
number, In the Promise God spoke immediately and 
for Himself. There was no screen to intercept the 
view of faith, no go-between like Moses, with God on 
the mountain-top shrouded in thunder-clouds and the 
people terrified or wantoning far below. Of all differ- 
ences between the Abrahamic and Judaic types of piety 
this was the chief. The man of Abraham's faith sees 
God in His unity. The Legalist gets his religion at 
second-hand, mixed with undivine elements. He be- 
lieves that there is one God; but his hold upon the 
truth is formal. There is no unity, no simplicity of 
faith in his conception of God. He projects on to the 
Divine image confusing shadows of human imperfec- 
tion. 

Gop is One: this great article of faith was the 
foundation of Israel's life. It forms the first sentence 
of the Shemd, the “Hear, O Israel” (Deut. vi. 4—9), 
which every pious Jew repeats twice a day, and which 
in literal obedience to the Law-giver’s words he fixes 
above his house-door, and binds upon his arm and 
brow at the time of prayer. Three times besides has 
the Apostle quoted this sentence. The first of these 
passages, Rom. iii. 29, 30,* may help us to understand 
its application here. In that place he employs it as 
a weapon against Jewish exclusiveness. If there is 
but “one God,” he argues, there can be only ome way 
of justification, for Jew and Gentile alike. The in- 
ference drawn here is even more bold and singular, 
There is ‘one Ged,” who appeared in His proper 
character in the Covenant with Abraham. If the Law 
of Moses gives us a conception of His nature in any 

* Comp. 1 Cor. viii. 6; 1 Tim. ii. 5 ; also Mark xii. 29, 30; Jas, 
ii. 19. 





iit, 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 201 


wise different from this, it is because other and lower 
elements found a place in it. Through the whole 
course of revelation there is ove God—manifest to 
Abraham, veiled in Mosaism, revealed again in His 
perfect image in “the face of Jesus Christ.” 

II. So far the Apostle has pursued the contrast 
between the systems of Law and Grace. When finally 
he has referred the latter rather than the former to 
the ‘one God,” we naturally ask, “Is the Law then 
against the promises of God?” (ver. 21). Was the 
Legal dispensation a mere reaction, a retrogression from 
the Promise? This would be to push Paul’s argument 
to an antinomian extreme. He hastens to protest. 
— The law against the promises? Away with the 
thought.” Not on the Apostle’s premises, but on those 
of his opponents, did this consequence ensue. It is 
they who set the two at variance, by trying to make 
law do the work of grace. ‘For if a law had been 
given that could bring men to life, righteousness would 
verily in that case have been of law” (ver. 21). That 
righteousness, and therefore life, is not of law, the 
Apostle has abundantly shown (ch. ii. 16; iii. 10— 
13). Had the Law provided some efficient means of 
its own for winning righteousness, there would then 
indeed have been a conflict between the two principles. 
As matters stand, there is none. Law and Promise 
move on different planes. Their functions are distinct. 
Yet there is a connection between them. The design 
of the Law is to mediate between the Promise and 
its fulfilment. ‘The trespass” must be “ multiplied,” 
the knowledge of sin deepened, before Grace can do 
its office. The fever of sin has to come to its crisis, 
before the remedy can take effect. Law is therefore 
not the enemy, but the minister of Grace. It was 


222 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





charged with a purpose lying beyond itself. “Christ 
is the end of the law, for righteousness” (Rom. x. 4). 

I. For, in the first place, she law cuts men off from all 
other hope of salvation. 

On the Judaistic hypothesis, “righteousness would 
have been of law.” But quite on the contrary, “the 
Scripture shuts up everything under sin, that the 
promise might be given in the way of faith in Jesus 
Christ, to them that believe” (ver. 22). Condemnation 
inevitable, universal, was pronounced by the Divine 
word under the Law, not in order that men might 
remain crushed beneath its weight, but that, abandoning 
vain hopes of self-justification, they might find in Christ 
their true deliverer. 

The Apostle is referring here to the general purport 
of ‘the Scripture.” His assertion embraces the whole 
teaching of the Old Testament concerning human 
sinfulness, embodied, for example, in the chain of 
citations drawn out in Rom. iii, 10—18. Wherever 
the man looking for legal justification turned, the 
Scripture met him with some new command which 
drove him back upon the sense of his moral helpless- 
ness. It fenced him in with prohibitions ; it showered 
on him threatenings and reproaches; it besieged him in 
ever narrowing circles. And if he felt less the pressure 
of its outward burdens, all the more was he tormented 
by inward disharmony and self-accusation. 

Now the judgement of Scripture is not uttered 
against this class of men or that, against this type of 
sin or that. Its impeachment sweeps the entire area of 
human life, sounding the depths of the heart, searching 
every avenue of thought and desire. It makes of the 
world one vast prison-house, with the Law for gaoler, 
and mankind held fast in chains of sin, waiting for 





i Ss ee 


iii. 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 223 


death. In this position the Apostle had found himself 
(Rom. vii. 24-—viii. 2); and in his own heart he saw a 
mirror of the world. “Every mouth was stopped, and 
all the world brought in guilty before God” (Rom. iii. 
19). This condition he graphically describes in terms 
of his former experience, in ver. 23 : “ Before faith came, 
under law we were kept in ward, being shut up unto 
the faith that was to be revealed.” The Law was all 
the while standing guard over its subjects, watching 
and checking every attempt to escape, * but intending 
to hand them over in due time to the charge of Faith. 
The Law posts its ordinances, like so many sentinels, 
round the prisoner’s cell. The cordon is complete. 
He tries again and again to break out; the iron circle 
will not yield. But deliverance will yet be his. The 
day of Faith approaches. It dawned long ago in 
Abraham’s Promise. Even now its light shines into his 
dungeon, and he hears the word of Jesus, ‘‘ Thy sins are 
forgiven thee ; go in peace.” Law, the stern gaoler, has 
after all been a good friend, if it has reserved him for 
this. It prevents the sinner escaping to a futile and 
illusive freedom. 

In this dramatic fashion Paul shows how the Mosaic 
law by its ethical discipline prepared men for a life 
which by itself it was incapable of giving. Where 
Law has done its work well, it produces, as in the 
Apostle’s earlier experience, a profound sense of personal 
demerit, a tenderness of conscience, a contrition of heart 
which makes one ready thankfully to receive “the 
righteousness which is of God by faith.” In every 
age and condition of life a like effect is wrought 





* Hence the Present participle, ovyxdeduevo. (Revised reading 
of ver. 23), in combination with the zwferfect of the foregoing verb, 


eppovpovue ba. 


224 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





upon men who honestly strive to live up to an exacting 
moral standard. They confess their failure. They lose 
self-conceit. They grow “poor in spirit,” willing to 
accept “the abundance of the gift of righteousness” in 
Jesus Christ. 

Faith is trebly honoured here. It is the condition of 
the gift, the characteristic of its recipient (vv. 22, 24), 
and the end for which he was put under the charge of 
Law (ver. 23). ‘To them that believe” is “ given,” as 
it was in foretaste to Abraham (ver. 6), a righteousness 
unearned, and bestowed on Christ’s account (ch. iii. 
13; Rom. v. 17, 18); which brings with it the in- 
dwelling of the Holy Spirit, reserved in its conscious 
possession for Abraham's children in the faith of Christ 
(ch. iii. 14; iv. 4). These blessings form the com- 
mencement of that true life, whose root is a spiritual 
union with Christ, and which reaches on to eternity 
(ch. ii. 20; Rom. v. 21; vi. 23). Of such life the Law 
could impart nothing; but it taught men their need 
of it, and disposed them to accept it. This was the 
purpose of its institution. It was the forerunner, not 
the finisher, of Faith. 

2. Paul makes use of a second figure to describe 
the office of the Law; under which he gives his final 
answer to the question of ver. 19. The metaphor of the 
gaoler is exchanged for that of the tutor. “The law 
hath been our waidaywyos for Christ.” This Greek 
word (doy-/eader) has no English equivalent ; we have 
not the thing it represents. The ‘“‘ pedagogue” was a 
sort of nursery governor,—a confidential servant in the 
Greek household, commonly a slave, who had charge of 
the boy from his infancy, and was responsible for his 
oversight. In his food, his clothes, his home-lessons, 
his play, his walks—at every point the pedagogue was 





iii. 19-24.] THE DESIGN OF THE LAW. 225 


required to wait upon his young charge, and to control 
his movements. Amongst other offices, his tutor might 
have to conduct the boy to school; and it has been 
supposed that Paul is thinking of this duty, as though 
he meant, ‘The Law has been our pedagogue, to 
take us to Christ, our true teacher.” But he adds, 
‘That we might be justified of faith.” The “ tutor” or 
ver. 24 is parallel to the ‘‘ guard” of the last verse ; he 
represents a distinctly disciplinary influence. 

This figure implies not like the last the imprisoned 
condition of the subject—but us childish, undeveloped 
state. This is an advance of thought. The Law was 
something more than a system of restraint and condem- 
nation. It contained an element of progress. Under 
the tutelage of his pedagogue the boy is growing up to 
manhood. At the end of its term the Law will hand 
over its charge mature in capacity and equal to the 
responsibilities of faith. “If then the Law is a 
madaywyos, it is not hostile to Grace, but its fellow- 
worker ; but should it continue to hold us fast when 
Grace has come, then it would be hostile” (Chrysostom). 

Although the highest function, that of ‘“ giving life,” 
_is denied to the Law, a worthy part is still assigned 
to it by the Apostle. It was ‘a tutor to lead men to 
Christ.” Judaism was an education for Christianity. 
It prepared the world for the Redeemer’s coming. It 
drilied and moralised the religious youth of the human 
race. It broke up the fallow-ground of nature, and 
cleared a space in the weed-covered soil to receive 
the seed of the kingdom. Its moral regimen 
deepened the conviction of sin, while it multiplied its 
overt acts. Its ceremonial impressed on sensuous 
natures the idea of the Divine holiness; and its sacri- 
ficial rites gave definiteness and vividness to men’s 


15 


226 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
conceptions of the necessity of atonement, failing indeed 
to remove sin, but awakening the need and sustaining 
the hope of its removal (Heb. x. I—18). 


The Law of Moses has formed in the Jewish nation 
a type of humanity like no other in the world. “ They 
dwell alone,” said Balaam, “and shall not be reckoned 
amongst the nations.” Disciplined for ages under their 
harsh ‘ pedagogue,” this wonderful people acquired a 
strength of moral fibre and a spiritual sensibility that 
prepared them to be the religious leaders of mankind. 
Israel has given us David and Isaiah, Paul and John. 
Christ above all was “born under law—of David's 
seed according to flesh.” The influence of Jewish 
minds at this present time on the world’s higher 
thought, whether for good or evil, is incalculable; and 
it penetrates everywhere. The Christian Church may 
with increased emphasis repeat Paul’s anticipation, 
“What will the receiving of them be, but life from the 
dead!” They have a great service still to do for the 
Lord and for His Christ. It was well for them and 
for us that they have “ borne the yoke in their youth.” 





CHAPTER XV. 
THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 


*¢ But now that faith is come, we are no longer under a tutor. For 
ye are all sons of God, through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many 
of you as were baptized into Christ did put on Christ. There can be 
neither Jew nor Greek, there can be neither bond nor free, there can 
be no male and female: for ye all are one mam in Christ Jesus. And 
if ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, heirs according to 
promise.” —GAL. iii. 25—29. 


x AITH has come!” At this announcement Law 

the tutor yields up his charge; Law the gaoler 
sets his prisoner at liberty. The age of servitude has 
passed. In truth it endured long enough. The iron 
of its bondage had entered into the soul. But at last 
_ Faith is come; and with it comes a new world. The 
clock of time cannot be put back. The soul of man 
will never return to the old tutelage, nor submit again to 
a religion of rabbinism and sacerdotalism. “ We are 
no longer under a pedagogue ;” we have ceased to be 
children in the nursery, schoolboys at our tasks—“ ye 
are all sons of God.” In such terms the newborn, free 
spirit of Christianity speaks in Paul. He had tasted 
the bitterness of the Judaic yoke ; noman more deeply. 
He had felt the weight of its impossible exactions, 
its fatal condemnation. This sentence is a shout cf 
deliverance. ‘ Wretch tath I am,” he had cried, ‘“‘ who 


228 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





shall deliver me ?—I give thanks to God through 
Jesus Christ our Lord; . . . for the law of the Spirit 
of life in Him hath freed me from the law of sin and 
death” (Rom. vii. 24—viii. 2). 

Faith is the true emancipator of the human mind.—It 
comes to take its place as mistress of the soul, queen 
in the realm of the heart; to be henceforth its spring 
of life, the norm and guiding principle of its activity. 
“The life that I live in the flesh,” Paul testifies, “I 
live in faith.” The Mosaic law—a system of ex- 
ternal, repressive ordinances—is no longer to be the 
basis of religion. Law itself, and for its proper pur- 
poses, Faith honours and magnifies (Rom. iii. 31). 
It is in the interests of Law that the Apostle insists on 
the abolishment of its Judaic form. Faith is an essen- 
tially just principle, the rightful, original ground of 
human fellowship with God. In the age of Abraham, 
and even under the Mosaic régime, in the religion of 
the Prophets and Psalmists, faith was the quickening 
element, the well-spring of piety and hope and moral 
vigour. Now it is brought to light. It assumes its 
sovereignty, and claims its inheritance. Faith is come 
—for Christ is come, its ‘‘author and finisher.” 

The efficacy of faith lies in tts object. ‘“ Works” 
assume an intrinsic merit in the doer; faith has its 
virtue in Him it trusts. It is the soul’s recumbency 
on Christ. “Through faith in Christ Jesus,” Paul 
goes on to say, “ye are all sons of God.” Christ 
evokes the faith which shakes off legal bondage, leaving 
the age of formalism and ritual behind, and beginning 
for the world an era of spiritual freedom. ‘Jn Christ 
Jesus” faith has its being ; He constitutes for the soul 
a new atmosphere and habitat, in which faith awakens 
to full existence, bursts the-confining shel? of tegalism, 





iii. 25-29.) THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 229 


recognises—itself-and-its-destiny,and-unfolds into the 
glorious consciousness of its Divine sonship. 

We prefer, with Ellicott and Meyer, to attach the 
complement “‘in Christ Jesus” * to “faith” (so in A.V.), 
rather than to the predicate, ““ Ye are sons ”—the con- 
struction endorsed by the Revised comma after “ faith.” 
The former connection, more obvious in itself, seems to 
us to fall in with the Apostle’s line of thought. And it 
is sustained by the language of ver. 27. Faith in Christ, 
baptism into Christ, and putting on Christ are connected 
and correspondent expressions. The first is the spiritual 
principle, the ground or element of the new life; the 
second, its visible attestation; and the third indicates 
the character and habit proper thereto. 

I. It is faith tn Christ then which constitutes us sons 
of God. This principle is the foundation-stone of the 
Christian life. 

In the Old Testament the sonship of believers lay in 
shadow. Jehovah was ‘the King, the Lord of Hosts,” 
the ‘ Shepherd of Israel.” They are “ His people, the 
sheep of His pasture ”— My servant Jacob,” He says, 
“Tsrael whom I have chosen.” If He is named Father, 
it is of the collective Israel, not the individual; other- 
wise the title occurs only in figure and apostrophe. 
The promise of this blessedness had never been expli- 
citly given under the Covenant of Moses. The assur- 
ance quoted in 2 Cor. vi. 18 is pieced together from 
scattered hints of prophecy. Old-Testament faith 
hardly dared to dream of such a privilege as this. It 
is not ascribed even to Abraham. Only to the kingly 





* The phrase faith in Christ Jesus is a link between this Epistle and 
those of the third and fourth groups. Comp. Col. i. 4; Eph.i. 15; 
1 Tim. tii. 13; 2 Tim. i. 13; iii, 15. More frequently in this con- 
nection our ‘‘in” represents els (z/o), not é as here, 


, 





230 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS., 


“Son of David” is it said, “I will be a Father unto 
him ; and he shall be to me for a son” (2 Sam. vii. 14). 

But “ beloved, now are we children of God” (1 John 
iii. 2). The filial consciousness is the distinction of 
the Church of Jesus Christ. The Apostolic writings 
are full of it. The unspeakable dignity of this relation- 
ship, the boundless hopes which it inspires, have left 
their fresh impress on the pages of the New Testa- 
ment. The writers are men who have made a vast 
discovery. They have sailed out into a new ocean. 
They have come upon,an infinite treasure. “Thou 
art no longer a slave, but a son!” What exultation 
filled the soul of Paul and of John as they penned 
such words! “ The Spirit of glory and of God” rested 
upon them. 

The Apostle is virtually repeating here what he said 
in vv. 2—5 touching the “receiving of the Spirit,” 
which is, he declared, ‘the distinctive mark of the 
Christian state, and raises its possessor ipso facto above 
the religion of externalism. The antithesis of flesh 
and spirit now becomes that of sonship and pupilage. 
Christ Himself, in the words of Luke xi. 13, marked 
out the gift of ‘‘the Holy Spirit” as the bond between 
the “heavenly Father” and His human children. Ac- 
cordingly Paul writes immediately, in ch. iv. 6, 7, of 
“(God sending forth the Spirit of His Son into our 
hearts” to show that we “are sons,” where we find 
again the thought which follows here in ver. 27, viz. 
that «on with Christ imparts this exalted status. This 
is after all the central conception of the Christian life 
Paul has already stated it as the sum of his own experi- 
ence: ‘Christ lives in me” (ch. ii. 20). “I have put 
on Christ” is the same thing in other words. In ch. 
ii, 20 he contemplates the union as an inner, vitalising 


iii. 25-29.] THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 231 


force; here it is viewed as matter of status and con- 
dition. The believer is zmvested with Christ. Heenters 
into the filial estate and endowments, since he is zz Christ 
Jesus. ‘For if Christ is Son of God, and thou hast 
put on Him, having the Son in thyself and being made 
like to Him, thou wast brought into one kindred and 
one form of being with Him” (Chrysostom). 

This was true of “so many as were baptized into 
Christ ’’"—an expression employed not in order to limit 
the assertion, but to extend it coincidently with the 
“all” of ver.26. There was no difference in this respect 
between the circumcised and uncircumcised. Every 
baptized Galatian was a son of God. Baptism mani- 
festly presupposes faith. To imagine that the opus 
operatum, the mechanical performance of the rite apart 
from faith present or anticipated in the subject, “clothes 
us with Christ,” is to hark back to Judaism. It is to 
substitute baptism for circumcision—a difference merely 
of form, so long as the doctrine of ritual regeneration 
remains the same. This passage is as clear a proof as 
could well be desired, that in the Pauline vocabulary 
“baptized” is synonymous with “ believing.” The 
baptism of these Galatians solemnised their spiritual 
union with Christ. It was the public acceptance, in 
trust and submission, of God’s covenant of grace—for 
their children haply, as well as for themselves. 

In the case of the infant, the household to which it 
belongs, the religious community which receives it to be 
nursed in its bosom, stand sponsors for its faith. On 
them will rest the blame of broken vows and responsi- 
bility disowned, if their baptized children are left to 
lapse into ignorance of Christ’s claims upon them. The 
Church which practises infant baptism assumes a very 
serious obligation, If it takes no sufficient care to 


232 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
have the rite made good, if children pass through its 
laver to remain unmarked and unshepherded, it is sin- 
ning against Christ. Such administration makes His 
ordinance an object of superstition, or of contempt. 
The baptism of the Galatians signalised their en- 
trance ‘‘into Christ,” the union of their souls with the 
dying, risen Lord. They were “baptized,” as Paul 
phrases it elsewhere, “into His death,” to “walk” 
henceforth with Him “in newness of life.” By its very 
form—the normal and most expressive form of primi- 
tive baptism, the descent into and rising from the 
symbolic waters—it pictured the soul’s death with 
Christ, its burial and its resurrection in Him, its 
separation from the life of sin and entrance upon the 
new career of a regenerated child of God (Rom. vi. 
3—14). This power attended the ordinance “ through 
faith in the operation of God who raised Christ from 
the dead” (Col. ii. 11—13). Baptism had proved to 
them “the laver of regeneration” in virtue of “the 
renewing of the Holy Spirit,” under those spiritual 
conditions of accepted mercy and “ justification by grace 
through faith,”* without which it is a mere law-work, 
as useless as any other. It was the outward and 
visible sign of the inward transaction which made the 
Galatian believers sons of God and heirs of life eternal. 
It was therefore a “putting on of Christ,” a veritable 
assumption of the Christian character, the filial relation- 
ship to God. Every such baptism announced to heaven 
and earth the passage of another soul from servitude 
to frecdcm, fiom death unto life, the birth of a brother 
into the family of God. From this day the new convert 
was a memler incorporate of the Pody of Christ, 





* Rom. vi. 1, 23 Tit. iii, 4—7 (‘Snot of works... that we had 
done).” 


iii. 25-29.] THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 233 





affianced to his Lord, not alone in the secret vows of 
his heart, but pledged to Him before his fellow-men. 
He had put on Christ—to be worn in his daily life, 
while He dwelt in the shrine of his spirit. And men 
would see Christ in him, as they see the robe upon 
its wearer, the armour glittering on the soldier’s breast. 

By receiving Christ, inwardly accepted in faith, visibly 
assumed in baptism, we are made sons of God. He 
makes us free of the house of God, where He rules as 


_Son, and where no slave may longer stay. Those 
who called themselves ‘‘ Abraham’s seed” and yet were 


“slaves of sin,” must be driven from the place in God’s 
household which they dishonoured, and must forfeit 
their abused prerogatives. They were not Abraham’s 
children, for they were utterly unlike him; the Devil 
surely was their father, whom by their lusts they 
featured. So Christ declared to the unbelieving Jews 
(John viii. 31—44). And so the Apostle identifies the 
children of Abraham with the sons of Goa, by faith 
united to ‘the Son.” Alike in the historical sonship 
toward Abraham and the supernatural sonship toward 
God, Christ is the ground of filiation. Our sonship is 
grafted upon His. He is “ the vine,” we “ branches ” in 
Him. He is the seed of Abraham, the Son of God ; we, 
sons of God and Abraham’s seed—“‘if we are Christ’s.” 
Through Him we derive from God; through Him all 
that is best in the life of humanity comes down to us. 
Christ is the central stock, the spiritual root of the 
human race. His manifestation reveals God to man, 
and man also to himself. In Jesus Christ we regain 
the Divine image, stamped upon us in Him at our 
creation (Col. i. 15, 16; iii. 10, 11), the filial like- 
ness to God which constitutes man’s proper nature. 
Its attainment is the essential blessing, the promise 


234 THE EPISTLE TO 7HE GALATIANS. 





which descended from Abraham along the succession of 
faith. 

Now this dignity belongs universally to Christian 
faith. “Ye are all,” the Apostle says, “sons of God 
through faith in Him.” Sonship is a human, not a 
Jewish distinction. The discipline Israel had endured, 
it endured for the world. The Gentiles have no need 
to pass through it again. Abraham’s blessing, when it 
came, was to embrace ‘‘all the families of the earth.” 
The new life in Christ in which it is realised, is as 
large in scope as it is complete in nature. “ Faith in 
Christ Jesus” is a condition that opens the door to 
every human being,—“ Jew or Greek, bond or free, 
male or female.” If then baptized, believing Gentiles 
are sons of God, they stand already on a level higher 
than any to which Mosaism raised its professors. 
“Putting on Christ,” they are robed in a righteousness 
brighter and purer than that of the most blameless 
legalist. What can Judaism do for them more? How 
could they wish to cover their glorious dress with its 
faded, worn-out garments? To add circumcision to 
their faith would be not to rise, but to sink from the 

____State of sons to that of serfs. 

II. On this first principle of the new life there rests 
asecond. The sons of God are brethren to each other. 
Christianity is the perfection of society, as well as of the 
individual. The faith of Christ restores the broken unity 

UL of mankind. “In Christ Jesus there is no Jew or 

Greek ; there is no bondman or freeman ; there is no 

male and female. You are all one in Him.” 

The Galatian believer at his baptism had entered a 
communion which gave him for the first time the sense 
of acommon humanity. In, Jesus Christ he found a 
bond of union with his fellows, an identity of interest 


iii. 25-29.) THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 235 





and aim so commanding that in its presence secular 
differences appeared as nothing. From the height to 
which his Divine adoption raised him these things 
were invisible. Distinctions of race, of rank, even that 
of sex, which bulk so largely in our SARE life and 
are sustained by all the force of pride a and habit, are 
forgotten here. These dividing lines and | party-walls 
have no power to sunder us from Christ, nor therefore 
from each other in Christ. The tide of Divine love and 
joy which through the gate of faith poured into the 
souls of these Gentiles of “many nations,” submerged 
all barriers. They are one in the brotherhood of the 
eternal life. When one says “I ama child of God,” 
one no longer thinks, “I am a Greek or Jew, rich or 
poor, noble or ignoble—man or woman.” A son of 
God !—that sublime consciousness fills his being. 

Paul, to be sure, does not mean that these differences 
have ceased to exist. He fully recognises them; and 
indeed insists strongly on the proprieties of sex, and on 
the duties of civil station. He values his own Jewish 
birth and Roman citizenship. But ‘in Christ Jesus” 
he “counts them refuse ” (Phil. iii. 4—8). Our relations 
to God, our heritage in Abraham’s Testament, depend 
on our faith in Christ Jesus and our possession of His 
Spirit. Neither birth nor office affects this relationship 
in the least degree. ‘‘As many as are led by the 
Spirit of God, they are the’sons of God” (Rom. viii. 
14). This is the Divine criterion of churchmanship, 
applied to prince or beg gear, to archbishop or sexton, 
with perfect impartiality. “God is no respecter BF 
persons.” 

This rule of the Apostle’s was a new principle in 
religion, pregnant with immense consequences. The 
Stoic cosmopolitan philosophy made a considerable 














236 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





approach to it, teaching as it did the worth of the 
moral person and the independence of virtue upon 
outward conditions. Buddhism previously, and Moham- 
medanism subsequently, each in its own way, addressed 
themselves to man as man, declaring ali believers equal 
and abolishing the privileges of race and caste. To 
their recognition of human brotherhood the marvellous 
victories won by these two creeds are largely due. These 
religious systems, with all their errors, were a signal 
advance upon Paganism with its “ gods many and lords 
many,” its local and national deities, whose worship 
belittled the idea of God and turned religion into an 
engine of hostility instead of a bond of union amongst 
men. 

Greek culture, moreover, and Roman government, as 
it has often been observed, had greatly tended to unify 
mankind. They diffused a common atmosphere of 
thought and established one imperial law round the 
circuit of the Mediterranean shores. But these con- 
quests of secular civilization, the victories of arms and 
arts, were achieved at the expense of religion. Poly- 
theism is essentially barbarian. It flourishes in division 
and ia ignorance. To bring together its innumerable 
gods and creeds was to bring them all into contenipt. 
The one law, the one learning now prevailing in the 
world, created a void in the conscience of mankind, 
only to be filled by the one faith. Without a centre of 
spiritual unity, histery shows that no other union will 
endure. But for Christianity, the Graeco-Roman civili- 
zation would have perished, trampled out by the feet 
of Goths and Huns. 

The Jewish faith failed to meet the world’s demand 
for a universal religion. It could never have saved 
European society. Nor was it designed for such a 


iii. 25-29.) THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 237 
purpose. True, its Jehovah was “the God of the whole 
earth.” The teaching of the Old Testament, as Paul 
easily showed, had a universal import and brought all 
men within the scope of its promises. But in its actual 
shape and its positive institutions it was still tribal and 
exclusive. Mosaism planted round the family of Abra- 
ham a fence of ordinances, framed of set purpose to 
make them a separate people and preserve them from 
heathen contamination. This system, at first main- 
tained with difficulty, in course of time gained control 
of the Israelitish nature, and its exclusiveness was 
aggravated by every device of Pharisaic ingenuity. 
Without an entire transformation, without in fact 
ceasing to be Judaism, the Jewish religion was doomed 
to isolation. Under the Roman Empire, in consequence 
of the ubiquitous dispersion of the Jews, it spread far 
and wide. It attracted numerous and influential con- 
verts. But these proselytes never were, and never 
could have been generally amalgamated with the sacred 
people. They remained in the outer court, worshipping 
the God of Israel “afar off” (Eph. ii. 11—22 ; iii. 4—6). 
This particularism of the Mosaic system was, to 
Paul’s mind, a proof of its temporary character. The 
abiding faith, the faith of ‘Abraham and his seed,” 
must be broad as humanity. It could know nothing 
of Jew and Gentile, of master and slave, nor even of 
man and woman; it knows only the soul and God. The 
gospel of Christ allied itself thus with the nascent in- 
stinct of humanity, the fellow-feeling of the race. It 
adopted the sentiment of the Roman poet, himself an en- 
franchised slave, who wrote: Homo sum, et humani 
ame nil alienum puto. In our religion human kinship, 
at last receives adequate expression. The Son of man 
lays the foundation of a world-wide fraternity. Th 


238 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 
one Father claims all men for His sons in Christ. A 
new, tenderer, holier humanity is formed around His 
cross. Men of the most distant climes and races, 
coming across their ancient battle-fields, clasp each 
other’s hands and say, “ Beloved, if God so loved us, 
we ought also to love one another.” 

The practice of the Church has fallen far below the 
doctrine of Christ and His Apostles. In this respect 
Mohammedans and Buddhists might teach Christian 
congregations a lesson of fraternity. The arrangements 
of our public worship seem often designed expressly 
to emphasize social distinctions, and to remind the poor 
man of his inequality. Our native haufeur and con- 
ventionality are nowhere more painfully conspicuous 
than in the house of God. English Christianity 
is seamed through and through with caste-feeling. 
This lies at the root of our sectarian jealousies. It is 
largely due to this cause that the social ideal of Jesus 
Christ has been so deplorably ignored, and that a frank 
brotherly fellowship amongst the Churches is at present 
impossible. Sacerdotalism first destroyed the Christian 
brotherhood by absorbing in the official ministry the 
functions of the individual believer. And the Protestant 
Reformation has but partially re-established these pre- 
rogatives. Its action has been so far too exclusively 
negative and frofestant, too little constructive and 
creative. It has allowed itself to be secularised and 
identified with existing national limitations and social 
distinctions. How greatly has the authority of our 
faith and the influence of the Church suffered from 
this error. The filial consciousness should produce the 
fraternal consciousness. With the former we may have 
a number of private Christians; with the latter only 
can we have a Church, 


iii. 25-29.] THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 239 


“Ye are all,” says the Apostle, ‘“‘one (man) in Christ 
Jesus.” The numeral is masculine, not neuter—one 
person (no abstract unity),* as though possessing one 
mind and will, and that “the mind that was in Christ.” 
Just so far as individual men are “in Christ” and He 
becomes the soul of their life, do they realise this unity. 
The Christ within them recognises the Christ without, 
as “ face answereth to face in a glass.” In this recog- 
nition social disparity vanishes. We think of it no 
more +k2n we shall do before the judgement-seat of 
Christ. What matters it whether my brother wears 
velvet or fustian, if Christ be in him? The humbleness 
of his birth or occupation, the uncouthness of his speech, 
cannot separate him, nor can the absence of these 
peculiarities separate his neighbour, from the love of 
God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Why should these 
differences make them strangers to each other in the 
Church? If both are zz Christ, why are they not one 
in Christ? A tide of patriotic emotion, a scene of pity 
or terror—a shipwreck, an earthquake—levels all classes 
and makes us feel and act as one man. Our faith in 


Christ should do no less. Or do we love God less than-—— 


we fear death? Is our country more to us than Jesus 
Christ ? In rare moments of exaltation we rise, it may 
be, to the height at which Paul sets our life. But until 
we can habitually and by settled principle in our 
Church-relations “know no man after the flesh,” we 
come short of the purpose of Jesus Christ (comp. 
John xvii. 20—23). 

The unity Paul desiderates would effectually counter- 
act the Judaistic agitation. The force of the latter lay 
in antipathy. Paul’s opponents contended that there 





* Comp. Eph. ii. 15 ; iv. 13; but sewer in ii. 14. 


240 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





must be “ Jew and Greek.” They fenced off the Jewish 
preserve from uncircumcised intruders. Gentile non- 
conformists must adopt their ritual ; or they will remain 
a lower caste, outside the privileged circle of the cove- 
nant-heirs of Abraham. Compelled under this pressure 
to accept the Mosaic law, it was anticipated that they 
would add to the glory of Judaism and help to maintain 
its institutions unimpaired. But the Apostle has cut 
the ground from under their feet. It is faith, he affirms, 
which-makés-men-sons of God. _And _faith,is equally 
possible to Jew or Gentile. Then Judaism is doomed. 
No system of caste, no principle of social exclusion has, 
on this assumption, any foothold in the Church. Spire 
tual life, nearness and likeness to the common Savioui 
—in a word character, is the standard of worth in His 
kingdom. And the range of that kingdom is made wide 
as humanity ; its charity, deep as the love of God. 


And “if you—whether Jews or Greeks—are Christ’s, 
then are you Abraham’s seed, heirs in terms of the 
Promise.” So the Apostle brings to a close this part 
of his argument, and links it to what he has said before 
touching the fatherhood of Abraham. Since ver. 18 we 
have lost sight of the patriarch; but he has not been 
forgotten. From that verse Paul has been conducting 
us onward through the legal centuries which parted 
Abraham from Christ. He has shown how the law of 
of Moses interposed between promise and fulfilment, 
schooling the Jewish race and mankind in them for its 
accomplishment. Now the long discipline is over. 
The hour of release has struck. Faith resumes her 
ancient sway, in a larger realm. In Christ a new, 
universal humanity comes into existence, formed of 
men who by faith are grafted into Him. Partakers of 


ili. 25-29.] THE EMANCIPATED SONS OF GOD. 241 


Christ, Gentiles also are of the seed of Abraham; the 
wild scions of nature share “the root and fatness of 
the good olive-tree.” All things are theirs; for they 
are Christ’s (1 Cor. iii. 21—23). 

Christ never stands alone. “In the midst of the 
Church—firstborn of many brethren” He presents Him- 
self, standing “in the presence of God for us.” He has 
secured for mankind and keeps in trust its glorious 
heritage. In Him we hold in fee the ages past and 
tocome. The sons of God are heirs of the universe. 


16 


CHAPTER XVI. 
THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 


“But I say that so long as the heir is a child, he differeth nothing from 
a bondservant, though he is lord of all; but is under guardians and 
stewards until the term appointed of the father. So we also, when we 
were children, were held in bondage under the rudiments of the world : 
but when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of 
a woman, born under the law, that He might redeem them which were 
under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because 
ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit of His Son into our hearts, 
crying, Abba Father. So that thou art no longer a bondservant, but 
a son; and ifa son, then an heir through God.” —GaAL., iv. I—7. 


HE main thesis of the Epistle is now established. 

Gentile Christians, Paul has shown, are in the 
true Abrahamic succession of faith. And this devolution 
of the Promise discloses the real intent of the Mosaic 
law, as an intermediate and disciplinary system. 
Christ was the heir of Abraham’s testament; He was 
therefore the end of Moses’ law. And those who are 
Christ’s inherit the blessings of the Promise, while 
they escape the curse and condemnation of the Law. 
The remainder of the Apostle’s polemic, down to 
ch. v. 12, is devoted to the illustration and enforce- 
ment of this position. 

In this, as in the previous chapter, the pre-Christian 
state is assigned to the Jew, who was the chief subject 
of Divine teaching in the former dispensation ; it is set 
forth under the first person (ver. 3), in the language of 


v. 1-7. THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 243 


recollection. Describing the opposite condition of son- 
ship, the Apostle reverts from the first to the second 
person, identifying his readers with himself (comp. 
ch. iii. 25, 26). True, the Gentiles had been in 
bondage (vv. 7, 8). This goes without saying. Paul’s 
object is to show that Judaism is a bondage. Upon 
this he insists with all the emphasis he can command. 
Moreover, the legal system contained worldly, un- 
spiritual elements, crude and childish conceptions of 
truth, marking it, in comparison with Christianity, as 
an inferior religion. Let the Galatians be convinced 
of this, and they will understand what Paul is going 
to say directly ; they will perceive that Judaic conformity 
is for them a backsliding in the direction of their 
former heathenism (vv. 8—10). But the force of this 
latter warning is discounted and its effect weakened 
when he is supposed, as by some interpreters, to 
include Gentile along with Jewish “rudiments” already 
in ver. 3. His readers could not have suspected this. 
The “So we also” and the “ held in bondage” of this 
verse carry them back to ch. iii, 23. By calling 
the Mosaic ceremonies ‘rudiments of the world” he 
gives Jewish susceptibilities just such a shock as pre- 
pares for the declaration of ver. 9, which puts them 
on a level with heathen rites. 

The difference between Judaism and Christianity, 
historically unfolded in ch. iii, is -here restated in 
graphic summary. We see, first, the heir of God in 
his minority ; and again, the same heir in possession of 
his estate. 

I. One can fancy the Jew replying to Paul’s previous 
argument in some such style as this. “You pour 
contempt,” he would say, “on the religion of your 
fathers. You make them out to have been no better 


244 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


than slaves. Abraham's inheritance, you pretend, 
under the Mosaic dispensation lay dormant, and is 
revived in order to be taken from his children and 
conferred on aliens.” No, Paul would answer: I admit 
that the saints of Israel were sons of God; I glory in 
the fact—“ who are Israelites, whose is the adoption of 
sons and the glory and the covenants and the law- 
giving and the promises, whose are the fathers” 
(Rom. ix. 4, 5). But they were sons in their minority. 
“And I say that as long as the heir is (legally) an 
infant, he differs in nothing from a slave, though (by 
title) lord of all.” 

The man of the Old Covenant was a child of God 
in posse, not im esse, in right but not in fact. The 
“infant” is his father’s trueborn son. In time he will 
be full owner. Meanwhile he is as subject as any 
slave on the estate. There is nothing he can command 
for his own. He is treated and provided for as a 
bondman might be ; put “under stewards” who manage 
his property, “ and guardians” in charge of his person, 
‘until the day fore-appointed of the father.” This 
situation does not exclude, it implies fatherly affection 
and care on the one side, and heirship on the other. 
But it forbids the recognition of the heir, his investment 
with filial rights. It precludes the access to the father 
and acquaintance with him, which the boy will gain 
in after years. He sees him at a distance and through 
cthers, under the aspect of authority rather than of 
love. In this position he does not yet possess the 
spirit of a son. Such was in truth the condition of 
llebrew saints—heirs of God, but knowing it not. 

This illustration raises in ver. 2 an interesting legal 
question, touching the latitude given by Roman or 
other current law to the father in dealing with his 





iv. 1-7.] THE HEIR'S COMING OF AGE. 245 





heirs. Paul's language is good evidence for the 
existence of the power he refers to. In Roman and in 
Jewish law the date of civil majority was fixed. Local 
usage may have been more elastic. But the case 
supposed, we observe, is not that of a dead father, into 
whose place the son steps at the proper age. A grant 
is made by a father sé/l Aving, who keeps his son in 
pupilage till he sees fit to put him in possession of the 
promised estate. There is nothing to show that 
paternal discretion was limited in these circumstances, 
any more than it is in English law. The father might 
fix eighteen, or twenty-one, or thirty years as the age 
at which he would give his son a settlement, just as 
he thought best. 

This analogy, like that of the “testament” in ch. 
iii., is not complete at all points ; nor could any human 
figure of these Divine things be made so. The essentia] 
particulars involved in it are first, the childishness of the 
infant heir; secondly, the subordinate position in which 
he is placed for the time, and thirdly, the right of the 
father to determine the expiry of his infancy. 

1. ‘When we were children,” says the Apostle. 
This implies, not a merely formal and legal bar, but an 
intrinsic disqualification. To treat the child as a man 
is preposterous. The responsibilities of property are 
beyond his strength and his understanding. Such 
powers in his hands could only be instruments of 
mischief, to himself most of all. In the Divine order, 
calling is suited to capacity, privilege to age. The 
coming of Christ was timed to the hour. The world 
of the Old Testament, at its wisest and highest, was 
unripe for His gospel. The revelation made to Paul 
could not have been received by Moses, or David, or 
Isaiah. His doctrine was only possible after and in 


246 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
consequence of theirs. There was a training of faculty, 
a deepening of conscience, a patient course of instruction 
and chastening to be carried out, before the heirs of the 
promise were fit for their heritage. Looking back to 
his own youthful days, the Apostle sees in them a 
reflex of the discipline which the people of God had 
required. The views he then held of Divine truth 
appear to him low and childish, in comparison with the 
manly freedom of spirit, the breadth of knowledge, the 
fulness of joy which he. has attained as a son of 
God through Christ. 

2. But what is meant by the “stewards and guardians” 
of this Jewish period of infancy? Ver. 3 tells us this, 
in language, however, somewhat obscure: “ We were 
held in bondage under the rudiments (or elements) of 
the world”—a phrase synonymous with the foregoing 
“under law” (ch. iii. 23). The “guard” and “tutor” 
of the previous section re-appears, with these “rudi- 
ments of the world” in his hand. They form the 
system under which the young heir was schooled, up 
to the time of his majority. They belonged to “the 
world” * inasmuch as they were, in comparison with 
Christianity, unspiritual in their nature, uninformed 
by “the Spirit of God’s Son” (ver. 6). The language 
of Heb. ix. I, 10 explains this phrase: “ The first 
covenant had a wor/d/y sanctuary,” with “ ordinances 
of flesh, imposed till the time of rectification.” The 
sensuous factor that entered into the Jewish revelation 
formed the point of contact with Paganism which Paul 


* Surely the world of men, not the cosmical elements; comp. 
Col. ii. 8. 20 (where rudiments of the world is pavallel to tradition of 
men); also Gal. vi. 14; Heb. ix. 1. 1 Cor. ili. 1—3 supplies an interesting 
parallel: those who are dades in Christ, are so far carnal and walk 
according to man, animated by the s¢isit of this world (1 Cor. ii, 12). 





iv. 1-7.] THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 247 


brings into view in the next paragraph. Yet rude 
and earthly as the Mosaic system was in some of 
its features, it was Divinely ordained and served an 
essential purpose in the progress of revelation. It 
shielded the Church’s infancy. It acted the part of 
a prudent steward, a watchful guardian. The heritage 
of Abraham came into possession of his heirs enriched 
by their long minority. Mosaism therefore, while 
spiritually inferior to the Covenant of grace in Christ, 
has rendered invaluable service to it (comp. ver. 24: 
Chapter XIV., p. 225). 

3. The will of the Father determined the period of 
this guardianship. However it may be in human law, 
this right of fore-ordination resides in the Divine 
Fatherhood. In His unerring foresight He fixed the 
hour when His sons should step into their filial place. 
All such “times and seasons,” Christ declared, “ the 
Father hath appointed on His own authority ”(Acts i. 7). 
He imposed the law of Moses, and annulled it, when 
He would. He kept the Jewish people, for their own 
and the world’s benefit, tied to the legal “ rudiments,” 
held in the leading-strings of Judaism. It was His 
to say when this subjection should cease, when the 
Church might receive the Spirit of His Son. If this 
decree appeared to be arbitrary, if it was strange that 
the Jewish fathers—men so noble in faith and character 
—were kept in bondage and fear, we must remind 
ourselves that “‘so it seemed good in the Father’s 
sight.” Hebrew pride found this hard to brook. To 
think that God had denied this privilege in time past 
to His chosen people, to bestow it all at once and by 
mere grace on Gentile sinners, making them at “the 
eleventh hour” equal to those who had borne for so 
long the burden and heat of the day! that the children 


248 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





of Abraham had been, as Paul maintains, for centuries 
treated as s/aves, and now these heathen aliens are 
made sons just as much as they! But this was God's 
plan; and it must be right. ‘‘ Who art thou, O man, 
that repliest against God ?” 

II. However, the nonage of the Church has passed. 
God’s sons are now to be owned for such. J¢ ts Christ's 
mission to constitute men sons of God (vv. 4, 5). 

His advent was the turning-point of human affairs, 
“the fulness of time.” Paul’s glance in these verses 
takes in a vast horizon. He views Christ in His 
relation both to God and to humanity, both to law and 
redemption. The appearance of “the Son of God, 
woman-born,” completes the previous course of time; 
it is the goal of antecedent revelation, unfolding “ the 
mystery kept secret through times eternal,” but now 
“made known to all the nations” (Rom. xvi. 25, 26). 
Promise and Law both looked forward to this hour. 
Sin had been “ passed by” in prospect of it, receiy- 
ing hitherto a partial and provisional forgiveness. The 
aspirations excited, the needs created by earlier religion 
demanded their satisfaction. The symbolism of type 
and ceremony, with their rude picture-writing, waited 
for their Interpreter. The prophetic soul of “the wide 
world, dreaming of things to come,” watched for this day. 
They that looked for Israel’s redemption, the Simeons 
and Annas of the time, the authentic heirs of the 
promise, knew by sure tokens that it was near, Their 
aged eyes in the sight of the infant Jesus descried its 
rising. The set time had come, to which all times 
looked since Adam’s fall and the first promise. At the 
moment when Israel seemed farthest from help and 
hope, the “horn of salvation was raised up in the house 
of David,”—God sent forth His Son. 


b 2 
= 
. 


ve 1-7.) THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 249 


1. The sending of the Son brought the world’s servitude 
toanend. “ Henceforth,” said Jesus, ‘I call you not 
servants” (John xv. 15). Till now “servant of God” 
had been the highest title men could wear. The 
heathen were enslaved to false gods (ver. 8). And 
Israel, knowing the true God, knew Him at a distance, 
serving too often in the spirit of the elder son of the 
parable, who said, “Lo these many years do I slave 
for thee” (Luke xv. 29). None could with free soul lift 
his eyes to heaven and say, ‘‘ Abba, Father.” Men had 
great thoughts about God, high speculations. They 
had learnt imperishable truths concerning His unity, 
His holiness, His majesty as Creator and Lawgiver. 
They named Him the “ Lord,” the “ Almighty,” the “I 
AM.” But His Fatherhood as Christ revealed it, they 
had scarcely guessed. They thought of Him as humble 
bondmen of a revered and august master, as sheep 
might of a good shepherd. The idea of a personal 
sonshif towards the Holy One of Israel was incon- 
ceivable, till Christ brought it with Him into the world, 
till God sent forth His Son. 

He sent Him as “His Son.” To speak of Christ, 
with the mystical Germans, as the zdeal Urmensch— 
the ideal Son of man, the foretype of humanity—is to 
express a great truth. Mankind was created in Christ, 
who is “‘the image of God, firstborn of all creation.” 
But this is not what Paul is saying here. The doubly 
compounded Greek verb at the head of this sentence 
(repeated with like emphasis in ver. 6) signifies “ sent 
forth from” Himself: He came in the character of 
God's Son, bringing His sonship with Him. He was 
the Son of God before He was sent out. He did not 
become so in virtue of His mission to mankind. His 
relations with men, in Paul’s conception, rested upon 


250 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
His pre-existing relationship to God. “The Word” 
who “became flesh, was with God, was God in the 
beginning.” “He called God His own Father, making 
Himself equal with God” (John v. 18): so the Jews 
had gathered from His own declarations. Paul admitted 
the claim when “God revealed His Son” to him, and 
affirms it here unequivocally. “ 

“The Son of God,” arriving “in the fulness of time,” 
enters human life. Like any other son of man, He is 
born of a woman, born under law. Here is the kenosis, 
the emptying of Divinity, of which the Apostle speaks 
in Phil. ii. 5—8. The phrase “ born of woman,” does 
not refer specifically to the wirgin-birth; this term 
describes human origin on the side of its weakness and 
dependence” (Job xiv. 1; Matt. xi. 11). Paul is think- 
ing not of the difference, but of the identity of Christ’s 
birth and our own. We are carried back to Bethlehem. 
We see Jesusa babe lying in His mother’s arms—God's 
Son a human infant, drawing His life from a weak 
woman ! * 

Nor is “born under law” a distinction intended to 
limit the previous term, as though it meant a born Jew, 
and not a mere woman’s son. This expression, to the 
mind of the reader of ch. iii., conveys the idea of sub- 
jection, of humiliation rather than eminence. “Though 
He was (God’s) Son,” Christ must needs “learn His 
obedience” (Heb. v. 8). The Jewish people experi- 
enced above all others the power of the law to chasten 
and humble. Their law was to them more sensibly, 
what the moral law is in varying degree to the world 
everywhere, an instrument of condemnation. God’s 
Son was now put under its power. As aman He was 





* Comp. Rom. i. 3, 43 ix. §; 2 Cor. xiii. 4; Eph. iv. 9, 10; Ph. ib 
6—8; Col. i. 15, 18; ii. 9; 1 Tim. iii. 16, 


iv. 1-7.] THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 251 


“under law;” as a Jew He came under its most 
stringent application. He declined none of the burdens 
of His birth. He submitted not only to the general 
moral demands of the Divine law for men, but to all 
the duties and proprieties incident to His position as 
a man, even to those ritual ordinances which His 
coming was to abolish. He set a perfect example of 
loyalty. ‘‘Thus it becometh us,” He said, “to fulfil 
all righteousness.” 

The Son of God who was to end the legal bondage, 
was sent into it Himself. He wore the legal yoke that 
He might break it. He took “the form of a servant,” 
to win our enfranchisement. ‘God sent forth His Son, 
human, law-bound—that He might redeem those under 
law.” 

Redemption was Christ's errand. We have learned 
already how ‘‘ He redeemed us from the curse of the 
law,” by the sacrifice of the cross (ch. iii. 13). This 
was the primary object of His mission : to ransom men 
from the guilt of past sin. Now we discern its further 
purpose—the positive and constructive side of the 
Divine counsel. Justification is the preface to adoption. 
The man “under law” is not only cursed by his 
failure to keep it; he lives in a servile state, debarred 
from filial rights. Christ “bought us out” of this 
condition. While the expiation rendered in His death 
clears off the entail of human guilt, His incarnate life 
and spiritual union with believing men sustain that 
action, making the redemption complete and permanent. 
As enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death 
of His Son;” now “reconciled, we shall be saved by 
His life” (Rom. v. 10). Salvation is not through the 
death of Christ alone. The Babe of Bethlehem, the 
crowned Lord of glory is our Redeemer, as well as the 


be dicmeic 


' - “4 


252 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
ene 
Man of Calvary. The cross is indeed the centre of 
His redemption ; but it has a vast circumference. All 
that Christ is, all that He has done and is doing as the 
Incarnate Son, the God-man, helps to make men sons 
of God. The purpose of His mission is therefore 
stated a second time and made complete in the words 
of ver. 5 b: “that we might receive the adoption of 
sons.” The sonship carries everything else with it— 
“if children, then heirs” (ver. 7). There is no room 
for any supplementary office of Jewish ritual. That 
is left behind with our babyhood. 

2. So much for the ground of sonship. Its proof 
lay in the sending forth of the Spirit of the Son. 

The mission of the Son and that of the Spirit are 
spoken of in vv. 3—6 in parallel terms: ‘God sent 
forth His Son—sent forth the Spirit of His Son,” the 
former into the world of men, the latter “into” their 
individual “hearts.” The second act matches the first, 
and crowns it. Pentecost is the sequel of the Incarna- 
tion (John ii. 21; 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20). And Pentecost 
is repeated in the heart of every child of God. The 
Apostle addresses himself to his readers’ experience 
(“because ye are sons”) as in ch. iii. 3—6, and on 
the same point. They had “received the Spirit:” this 
marked them indubitably as heirs of Abraham (ch, iii. 
14)—and what is more, sons of God. Had not the 
mystic cry, Absa, Father, sounded in their hearts ? 
The filial consciousness was born within them, super- 
naturally inspired. When they believed in Christ, 
when they saw in Him the Son of God, their Redeemer, 
they were stirred with a new, ecstatic impulse; a 
Divine glow of love and joy kindled in their breasts ; 
a voice not their own spoke to their spirit—their soul 
leaped forth upon their lips, crying to God, “ Father, 


iv. 1-7.] THE HEIR’S COMING OF AGE. 253 


Father!” They were children of God, and knew it. 
“The Spirit Himself bore them witness” (Rom. 
viii. 15). 

This sentiment was not due to their own reflection, 
not the mere opening of a buried spring of feeling in 
their nature. God sent it into their hearts. The out- 
ward miracles which attended the first bestowment of 
this gift, showed from what source it came (ch. ili. 5). 
Nor did Christ personally impart the assurance. He 
had gone, that the Paraclete might come. Here was 
another Witness, sent by a second mission from the 
Father (John xvi. 7). His advent is signalised in 
clear distinction from that of the Son. He comes in 
the joint name of Father and of Son. Jesus called Him 
“the Spirit of the Father ;” * the Apostle, “the Spirit 
of God’s Son.” 

To us He is “the Spirit of adoption,” replacing the 
former “spirit of bondage unto fear.” For by His 
indwelling we are “joined to the Lord” and made “ one 
spirit” with Him, so that Christ lives in us (ch. ii. 20). 
And since Christ is above all things the Son, His Spirit 
is a spirit of sonship; those who receive Him are sons 
of God. Our sonship is through the Holy Spirit derived 
from His. Till Christ's redemption was effected, such 
adoption was in the nature of things impossible. This 
filial ery of Gentile hearts attested the entrance of a 
Divine life into the world. The Spirit of God’s Son 
had become the new spirit of mankind. 

Abba, the Syrian vocative for father, was a word 
familiar to the lips of Jesus. The instance of its use 
recorded in Mark xiv. 36, was but one of many such. 
No one had hitherto approached God as He did. His 


_ 





* Matt. x. 20; Luke xi. 13; John xiv. 16; Actsi. 4, 5. 


7 


254 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





utterance of this word, expressing the attitude of 
His life of prayer and breathing the whole spirit of 
His religion, profoundly affected His disciples. So that 
the Abba of Jesus became a watchword of His Church, 
being the proper name of the God and Father of our 
Lord Jesus Christ. Gentile believers pronounced it, 
conscious that in doing so they were joined in spirit to 
the Lord who said, “My Father, and your Father!” 
Greek-speaking Christians supplemented it by their 
own equivalent, as we by the English Father. This 
precious vocable is carried down the ages and round 
the whole world in the mother-tongue of Jesus, a 
memorial of the hour when through Him men learned 
to call God Father. 

“‘Because ye are sons, God sent forth the Spirit,” 
with this cry. The witness of sonship follows on the 
adoption, and seals it. The child is born, then cries ; 
the cry is the evidence of life. But this is not the first 
office of the Holy Spirit to the regenerate soul. Many 
a silent impulse has He given, frequent and long con- 
tinued may have been His visitations, before His 
presence reveals itself audibly. From the first the new 
life of grace is implanted by His influence. “ That which 
is born of the Spirit, is spirit.” “He dwelleth with you, 
and 7s in you,’ * said Jesus to His disciples, before the 
Pentecostal effusion. Important and decisive as the 
witness of the Holy Spirit to our sonship is, we must 
not limit His operation to this event. Deeply has He 
wrought already on the soul in which His work reaches 
this issue; and when it is reached, He has still much 
to bestow, much to accomplish in us. All truth, all 
holiness, all comfort are His; and into these He leads 


* John xiv. 17; the present (éoriv) is the preferable reading. See 
Westcott ad /¢. 





iv. 1-7.] THE HEIR'S COMING OF AGE. 255 


the children of God. Living by the Spirit, in Him we 
proceed to walk (ch. v. 25). 

The interchange of person in the subject of vv. 
5—8 is very noticeable. This agitated style betrays 
high-strung emotion. Writing first, in ver. 3, in the 
language of Jewish experience, in ver. 6 Paul turns upon 
his readers and claims them for witnesses to the same 
adoption which Jewish believers in Christ (ver. 5) had 
received. Instantly he falls back into the first person ; 
it is his own joyous consciousness that breaks forth in 
the filial cry of ver.6 5. Inthe more calm concluding 
sentence the second person is resumed ; and now in the 
individualising singular, as though he would lay hold of 
his readers one by one, and bid them look each into 
his own heart to find the proof of sonship, as he writes: 
“So that thou art no longer a slave, but a son ; and if 
a son, also an heir through God.” 

An heir through God—this is the true reading, and is 
greatly to the point. It carries to aclimax the emphatic 
repetition of “God” observed in vv. 4 and 6. ‘God 
sent His Son.” into the world; ‘‘God sent” in turn 
“His Son’s Spirit into your hearts.” God then, and 
no other, has bestowed your inheritance. It is yours 
by His fiat. Who dares challenge it?* Words how 
suitable to reassure Gentile Christians, browbeaten by 
arrogant Judaism! Our reply is the same to those 
who at this day deny our Christian and churchly 
standing, because we reject their sacerdotal claims. 

What this inheritance includes in its final attainment, 
“doth not yet appear.” Enough to know that “now 
are we children of God.” The redemption of the body, 
the deliverance of nature from its sentence of dissolu- 


* Comp. Rom. viii. 31—35 ; Acts xi. 17. 


256 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


tion, the abolishment of death—these are amongst its 
certainties. Its supreme joy lies in the promise of 
being with Christ, to witness and share His glory.* 
“ Heirs of God, joint-heirs with Christ ”—a destiny like 
this overwhelms thought and makes hope a rapture. 
God’s sons may be content to wait and see how their 
heritage will turn out. Only let us be sure that we are 
His sons. Doctrinal orthodoxy, ritual observance, 
moral propriety do not impart, and do not supersede 
‘the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.” The religion 
of Jesus the Son of God is the religion of the filial 
consciousness. 


* John xii. 26; xvii. 24; Rev. iii. 21; Phil. i. 23; Col. iii. 4; 
I Pet. v. I. 


CHAPTER XVII. 
THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 


** Howbeit at that time, not knowing God, ye were in bondage to 
them which by nature are no gods : but now that ye have come to know 
God, or rather to be known of God, how turn ye back again to the 
weak and beggarly rudiments, whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over 
again? Ye observe days, and months, and seasons, and years. I am 
afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed labour upon you in 
vain ”—GAL. iv. 8—II. 


“ C*ONS of God, whom He made His heirs in Christ, 

how are you turning back to legal bondage!” 
Such is the appeal with which the Apostle follows up 
his argument. “ Foolish Galatians,” we seem to hear 
him say again, ‘who has bewitched you into this ?” 
They forget the call of the Divine grace; they turn 
away from the sight of Christ crucified; nay, they 
are renouncing their adoption into the family of God. 
Paul knew something of the fickleness of human 
nature ; but he was not prepared for this. How can 
men who have tasted liberty prefer slavery, or full- 
grown sons desire to return to the “ rudiments” of child- 
hood? After knowing God as He is in Christ, is it 
possible that these Galatians have begun to dote on 
ceremonial, to make a religion of “ times and seasons ;” 
that they are becoming devotees of Jewish ritual ? 
What can be more frivolous, more irrational than this ? 
On such people Paul's labours seem to be thrown away, 


a 


258 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


“You make me fear,” he says, ‘‘ that I have toiled for 
you in vain.” 

In this expostulation two principles emerge with 
especial prominence. 

I. First, that knowledge of God, bringing spiritual 
freedom, lays upon us higher responsibilities. ‘“ Then 
indeed,” he says, ‘‘not knowing God, you were in 
bondage to false gods. Your heathen life was in a 
sense excusable. But now something very different 
is expected from you, since you have come to know 
God.” 

We are reminded of the Apostle’s memorable words 
spoken at Athens: “The times of ignorance God over- 
looked” (Acts xvii. 30). “Ye say, We see,” said 
Jesus ; “your sin remaineth” (John ix. 41). Increased 
light brings stricter judgement. If this was true of 
men who had merely heard the message of Christ, how 
much more of those who had proved its saving power. 
Ritualism was well enough for Pagans, or even for 
Jews before Christ’s coming and the outpouring of His 
Spirit—but for Christians! For those into whose 
hearts God had breathed the Spirit of His Son, who 
had learned to “‘ worship God in the Spirit and to have 
no confidence in the flesh”—for Paul’s Galatians to 
yield to the legalist “‘ persuasion” was a fatal relapse. 
In principle, and in its probable issue, this course was 
a reverting toward their old heathenism. 

The Apostle again recalls them, as he does so often 
his children in Christ, to the time of their conversion. 
‘They had been, he reminds them, idolaters ; ignorant 
of the true God, they were “enslaved to things that 
by nature are no gods.” Two definitions Paul has 
given of idolatry: “There is no idol in the world;” 
and again, ‘‘The things which the Gentiles sacrifice, 


iv. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 259 


they sacrifice to demons, and not to God” (1 Cor. viii. 
4; x. 20). Half lies, half devilry: such was the 
popular heathenism of the day. “ Gods many and lords 
many” the Galatian Pagans worshipped—a strange 
Pantheon. There were their old, weird Celtic deities, 
before whom our British forefathers trembled. On 
this ancestral faith had been superimposed the frantic 
rites of the Phrygian Mother, Cybele, with her muti- 
lated priests; and the more genial and humanistic 
cultus of the Greek Olympian gods. But they were 
gone, the whole ‘‘damnéd crew,” as Milton calls 
them ; for those whose eyes had seen the glory in the 
face of Jesus Christ, their spell was broken; heaven 
was swept clear and earth pure of their foul presence. 
The old gods are dead. No renaissance of humanism, 
no witchcraft of poetry can re-animate them. To us 
after these eighteen centuries, as to the Galatian ' 
believers, “there is one God the Father, of whom are 
all things, and we for Him; and one Lord Jesus 
Christ, through whom are all things, and we through 
Him.” A man who knew the Old Testament, to say 
nothing of the teaching of Christ, could never sacrifice to 
Jupiter and Mercurius any more, nor shout “ Great is 
Diana of the Ephesians.” They were painted idols, 
shams; he had seen through them. They might 
frighten children in the dark; but the sun was up. 
Christianity destroyed Paganism as light kills dark- 
ness. Paul did not fear that his readers would slide 
back into actual heathenism. That was intellectually 
impossible. There are warnings in his Epistles 
against the spirit of idolatry, and against conformity 
with its customs; but none against return to its 
beliefs. 

The old heathen life was indeed a s/avery, full of fear 


260 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


and degradation. The religious Pagan could never be 
sure that he had propitiated his gods sufficiently, or 
given to all their due. They were jealous and revenge- 
ful, envious of human prosperity, capable of infinite 
wrongdoing. Inthe worship of many of them acts were 
enjoined revolting to the conscience. And this is true 
of Polytheism all over the world. It is the most 
shameful bondage ever endured by the soul of man. 

But Paul’s readers had “ come to know God.” They 
had touched the great Reality. The phantoms had 
vanished; the Living One stood before them. His 
glory shone into their hearts “in the face of Jesus 
Christ.” This, whenever it takes place, is for any man 
the crisis of his life—when he comes to know God, when 
the God-consciousness is born in him. Like the dawn 
of self-consciousness, it may be gradual. There are 
those, the happy few, who were ‘“‘ born again” so soon 
as they were born to thought and choice ; they cannot 
remember a time when they did not love God, when they 
were not sensible of being “known of Him.” But with 
cthers, as with Paul, the revelation is made at an instant, 
coming like a lightning-flash at midnight. But unlike 
the lightning it remained. Let the manifestation of 
God come how or when it may, it is decisive. The man 
into whose soul the Almighty has spoken His J AM, 
can never be the same afterwards. He may forget; he 
may deny it: but he has Anown God; he has seen the 
light of life. If he returns to darkness, his darkness 
is blacker and guiltier than before. On his brow there 
rests in all its sadness “Sorrow’s crown of sorrow, 
remembering happier things.” 

Offences venial, excusable hitherto, from this time 
assume a graver hue. Things that in a lower stage of 
life were innocent, and even possessed religious value, 


v. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 261 


may now be unlawful, and the practice of them a declen- 
sion, the first step in apostasy. What is delightful in a 
child, becomes folly in a grown man. The knowledge 
of God in Christ has raised us in the things of the 
spirit to man’s estate, and it requires that we should 
“put away childish things,” and amongst them ritual 
display and sacerdotal officiations, Pagan, Jewish, or 
Romish. These things form no part of the knowledge 
of God, or of the ‘‘ true worship of the Father.” 

The Jewish “rudiments” were designed for men 
who had not known God as Christ declares Him, who 
had never seen the Saviour’s cross. Jewish saints 
could not worship God in the Spirit of adoption. They 
remained under the spirit of servitude and fear. Their 
conceptions were so far “weak and poor” that they 
supposed the Divine favour to depend on such matters 
as the “washing of cups and pots,” and the precise 
number of feet that one walked on the Sabbath. These 
ideas belonged to a childish stage of the religious 
life. Pharisaism had developed to the utmost this 
lower element of the Mosaic system, at the expense of 
everything that was spiritual in it. Men who had been 
brought up in Judaism might indeed, after conversion 
to Christ, retain their old customs as matters of social 
usage or pious habit, without regarding them as vital 
to religion. With Gentiles it was otherwise. Adopt- 
ing Jewish rites de novo, they must do so on grounds 
of distinct religious necessity. For this very reason the 
duty of circumcision was pressed upon them. It was a 
means, they were told, essential to their spiritual per- 
fection, to the attainment of full Christian privileges. 
But to know God by the witness of the Holy Spirit of 
Christ, as the Galatians had done, was an experience 
sufficient to show that this ‘‘ persuasion” was false, 


262 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


It did not ‘ come of Him that called them,” It intro- 
duced them to a path the opposite of that they had 
entered at their conversion, a way that led downwards 
and not upwards, from the spiritual to the sensuous, 
from the salvation of faith to that of self-wrought work 
of law. 

“Known God,” Paul says,—“ or rather were known 
of God.” He hastens to correct himself. He will not 
let an expression pass that seems to ascribe anything 
simply to human acquisition. ‘ Ye have not chosen 
Me,” said Jesus ; “‘I have chosen you.” So the Apostle 
John: ‘‘ Not that we loved God, but that He loved us.” 
This is true through the entire range of the Christian 
life. ‘We apprehend that for which we were appre- 
hended by Christ Jesus.” Our love, our knowledge— 
what are they but the sense of the Divine love and 
knowledge in us? Religion is a bestowment, not an 
achievement. It is “God working in us to will and 
work for the sake of His good pleasure.” In this light 
the gospel presented itself at first to the Galatians. 
The preaching of the Apostle, the vision of the cross 
of Christ, made them sensible of God's living presence. 
They felt the gaze of an Infinite purity and compassion, 
of an All-wise, All-pitiful Father, fixed upon them. He 
was calling them, slaves of idolatry and sin, “into the 
fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ.” The illuminating 
glance of God pierced to their inmost being. In that 
light God and the soul met, and knew each other. 

And now, after this profound, transforming revelation, 
this sublime communion with God, will they turn back 
to a life of puerile formalities, of slavish dependence 
and fear? Is the strength of their devotion to be 
spent, its fragrance exhaled in the drudgery of legal 
service? Surely they know God better than to think 








iv. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 263 


that He requires this. And He who knew them, as 
they have proved, and knows what was right and 
needful for them, has imposed no such burden. He 
granted them the rich gifts of His grace—the Divine 
sonship, the heavenly heirship—on terms of mere faith 
in Christ, and without legal stipulation of any kind. 
Is it not enough that God knows them, and counts 
them for His children ! 

So knowing, and so known, let them be content. 
Let them seek only to keep themselves in the love of 
God, and in the comfort of His Spirit. Raised to this 
high level, they must not decline to a lower. Their 
heathen “rudiments” were excusable before ; but now 
even Jewish ‘‘rudiments” are things to be left behind. 

II. It further appears that the Apostle saw an element 
existing in Judaism common to it with the ethnic religions. 
For he says that his readers, formerly “enslaved to 
idols,” are “‘ now turning back to the weak and beggarly 
rudiments, to which they would fain be in bondage 
over again.” 

“ The rudiments” of ver. 9 cannot, without exegetical 
violence, be detached from “the rudiments of the 
world” of ver. 3. And these latter plainly signify the 
Judaic rites (see Chapter XVI.). The Judaistic practices 
of the Galatians were, Paul declares, a backshding toward 
their old idolatries. ‘We can only escape this construc- 
tion of the passage at the cost of making the Apostle’s 
remonstrance inconsequent and pointless. The argu- 
ment of the letter hitherto has been directed with 
concentrated purpose against Judaic conformity. To 
suppose that just at this point, in making its application, 
he turns aside without notice or explanation to an 
entirely different matter, is to stultify his reasoning. 
The only ground for referring the ‘‘days and seasons” 


264 THE EPISTLE 170 THE GALATIANS. 





of ver. 10 to any other than a Jewish origin, lies in 
the apprehension that such reference disparages the 
Christian Sabbath. 

But how, we ask, was it possible for Paul to use 
language which identifies the revered law of God with 
rites of heathenism, which he accounted a “ fellowship 
with demons”? Bishop Lightfoot has answered this 
question in words we cannot do better than quote: 
“The Apostle regards the higher element in heathen 
religion as corresponding, however imperfectly, to the 
lower in the Mosaic law. For we may consider both 
the one and the other as made up of two component 
parts, the spiritual and the ritualistic. Now viewed in 
their spiritual aspect, there is no comparison between 
the one and the other. In this respect the heathen 
religions, so far as they added anything of their own 
to that sense of dependence on God which is innate 
in man and which they could not entirely crush, were 
wholly bad. On the contrary, in the Mosaic law the 
spiritual element was most truly divine. But this does 
not enter into our reckoning here. For Christianity 
has appropriated all that was spiritual in its pre- 
decessor. . . . The mtualistic element alone remains to 
be considered, and here is the meeting-point of Judaism 
and Heathenism. In Judaism this was as much lower 
than its spiritual element, as in Heathenism it was 
higher. Hence the two systems approach within such 
a distance that they can, under certain limitations, be 
classed together. They have at least so much in 
common that a lapse into Judaism can be regarded as a 
relapse into the position of unconverted Heathenism, 
Judaism was a system of bondage like Heathenism. 
Heathenism had been a disciplinary training like 
Judaism ” (Commentary 7” /oc.). 


v. 8-11] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 268 

This line of explanation may perhaps be carried a 
step further. Judaism was rudimentary throughout. 
A religion so largely ritualistic could not but be spiri- 
tually and morally defective. In its partial apprehension 
of the Divine attributes, its limitation of God’s grace to 
a single people, its dim perception of immortality, there 
were great deficiencies in the Jewish creed. Its ethical 
code, moreover, was faulty; it contained “ precepts 
given for the hardness of men’s hearts’—touching, 
for example, the laws of marriage, and the right of 
revenge. There was not a little in Judaism, especially 
in its Pharisaic form, that belonged to a half-awakened 
conscience, to a rude and sensuous religious faculty. 
Christ came to “ fulfil the law;” but in that fulfilment 
He did not shrink from correcting it. He emended 
the letter of its teaching, that its true spirit might be 
elicited. For an enlightened Christian who had learned 
of Jesus the “royal law, the law of liberty,” to conform 
to Judaism was unmistakably to “turn back.” More- 
over, it was just the weakest and least spiritual part of 
the system of Moses that the legalist teachers inculcated 
on Gentile Christians ; while their own lives fell short 
of its moral requirements (ch. vi. 12). 

Mosaism had been in the days of its inspiration and 
creative vigour the great opponent of idolatry. It was 
the Lord's witness throughout long centuries of heathen 
darkness and oppression, and by its testimony has ren- 
dered splendid service to God and man. But from the 
standpoint of Christianity acertain degree of resemblance 
begins to be seen underlying this antagonism. The 
faith of the Israelitish people combatted idolatry with 
weapons too much like its own. A worldly and servile 
element remained in it. To one who has advanced in 
front, positions at an earlier stage of his progress lying 


266 THE EPISTLE TO TUE GALATIANS. 








apart and paths widely divergent now assume the 
same general direction. To resort either to Jewish or 
heathen rites, meant 4o turn back from Christ. It was 
to adopt principles of religion obsolete and unfit for 
those who had known God through Him. What in its 
time and for its purpose was excellent, nay indispens- 
able, in doctrine and in worship, in time also had 
‘decayed and waxed old.” To tie the living spirit of 
Christianity to dead forms is to tie it to corruption. 
““Weak and beggarly rudiments ”—it is a hard sen- 
tence ; and yet what else were Jewish ceremonies and 
rules of diet, in comparison with “righteousness and 
peace and joy in the Holy Ghost”? What was cir- 
cumcision, now that there was no longer “ Jew and 
Greek?” What was there in Saturday more than in 
any other day of the week, if it ceased to be a sign 
between the Lord of the Sabbath and His people? 
These things were, as Paul saw them, the cast-clothes 
of religion. For Gentile Christians the history of the 


Jewish ordinances had much instruction; but their’ 


observance was no whit more binding than that of 
heathen ceremonies. Even in the ancient times God 
valued them only as they were the expression of a 
devout, believing spirit. “Your new moons and your 
appointed feasts,” He had said to an ungodly genera- 
tion, “ My soul hateth” (Isa. i. 14). And was He 
likely to accept them now, when they were enforced by 
ambition and party-spirit, at the expense of His Church's 
peace; when their observance turned men’s thoughts 
away from faith in His Son, and in the power of His 
life-giving Spirit? There is nothing too severe, too 
scornful for Paul to say of these venerable rites of 
Israel, now that they stand in the way of a living 
faith and trammel the freedom of the sons of God, 


iv. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 267 


He tosses them aside as the swaddling-bands of the 
Church’s infancy—childish fetters, too weak to hold the 
limbs of grown men. “He brake in pieces the brazen 
serpent that Moses had made; for the children of Israel 
did burn incense to it; and he called it Nehushtan—a 
piece of brass” (2 Kings xviii. 4). Brave Hezekiah! 
Paul does the same with the whole ceremonial of Moses. 
“ Beggarly rudiments,” he-says. What divine refresh- 
ment there is in a blast of wholesome scorn! It was 
their traditions, their ritual that the Judaists worshipped, 
not the Holy One of Israel. ‘‘ They would compass 
sea and land to make one proselyte,” and then ‘make 
him twofold more the child of hell than themselves.” 
This was the only result that the success of the Judaistic 
agitation could have achieved. 

In thus decrying Jewish ordinances, the Apostle by 
implication allows a certain value to the rites of Pagan- 
ism. The Galatians were formerly in bondage to 
“them that are no gods.” Now, he says, they are 
turning again to the like servitude by conforming to 
Mosaic legalism. They wish to come again under 
subjection to “the weak and poor rudiments.” In 
Galatian heathenism Paul appears to recognise “ rudi- 
ments ” of truth and a certain preparation fer Christi- 
anity. While Judaic rites amounted to no more than 
rudiments of a spiritual faith, there were influences 
at work in Paganism that come under the same 
category. Paul believed that ‘God had not left Him- 
self without witness to any.” He never treated heathen 
creeds with indiscriminate contempt, as though they 
were utterly corrupt and worthless. Witness his 
address to the “ religious” Athenians, and to the wild 
people of Lycaonia (Acts xiv. I5—17; xvii. 22—31). 
He finds his text in “certain of your own (heathen) 


268 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





poets.” He appeals to the sense of a Divine presence 
“not far from any one of us ;” and declares that though 
God was “unknown” to the nations, they were under 
His guidance and were “ feeling after Him.” To 
this extent Paul admits a Preparatio evangelica in 
the Gentile world; he would have been prepared, with 
Clement of Alexandria and Origen, and with modern 
students of comparative religion, to trace in the poets 
and wise men of Greece, in the lawgivers of Rome, in 
the mystics of the East, presentiments of Christianity, 
ideas and aspirations that pointed to it as their fulfil- 
ment. The human race was not left in total darkness 
beyond the range of the light shining on Zion’s hill. 
The old Pagans, “suckled in a creed outworn,” were 
not altogether God-forsaken. They too, amid darkness 
like the shadow of death, had “ glimpses that might 
make them less forlorn.” And so have the heathen 
still. We must not suppose either that revealed 
religion was perfect from the beginning; or that the 
natural religions were altogether without fragments and 
rudiments of saving truth. 

“Days you are scrupulously keeping, and months, 
and seasons, and years,’—the weekly sabbath, the 
new moon, the annual festivals, the sacred seventh 
year, the round of the Jewish Kalendar. On these 
matters the Galatians had, as it seems, already fallen 
in with the directions of the Jewish teachers. The 
word by which the Apostle describes their practice, 
mapatnpeiobe, denotes, besides the fact, the manner 
and spirit of the observance—an assiduous, anxious 
attention, such as the spirit of legal exaction dictated. 
These prescriptions the Galatians would the more 
readily adopt, because in their heathen life they were 
accustomed to stated celebrations. The Pagan Kalendar 


iv. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE, 269 


was crowded with days sacred to gods and divine 
heroes. This resemblance justified Paul all the more 
in taxing them with relapsing towards heathenism. 

The Church of later centuries, both in its Eastern 
and Western branch, went far in the same direction. 
It made the keeping of holy days a prominent and 
obligatory part of Christianity ; it has multiplied them 
superstitiously and beyond all reason. Amongst the 
rest it incorporated heathen festivals, too little changed 
by their consecration. 

Paul’s remonstrance condemns in principle the 
enforcement of sacred seasons as things essential to 
salvation, in the sense in which the Jewish Sabbath 
was the bond of the ancient Covenant. We may not 
place even the Lord’s Day upon this footing. Far 
different from this is the unforced and grateful celebration 
of the First Day of the week, which sprang up in the 
Apostolic Church, and is assumed by the Apostles Paul 
and John (1 Cor. xvi. 2; Rev. i. 10). The rule of the 
seventh day’s rest has so much intrinsic fitness, and 
has brought with it so many benefits, that after it had 
been enforced by strict law in the Jewish Church for 
so lom&, its maintenance could now be left, without 
express re-enactment, as a matter of freedom to the 
good sense and right feeling of Christian believers, 
“‘sons of the resurrection.” Its legislative sanction 
rests on grounds of public propriety and national well- 
being, which need not to be asserted here. Wherever 
the “Lord of the Sabbath” rules, His Day will be 
gladly kept for His sake. 

The Apostle in protecting Gentile liberties is no 
enemy to order in worship and outward life. No one 
can justly quote his authority in opposition to such 
appointments as a Christian community may make, for 


270 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


reasons of expediency and decorum, in the regulation 
of its affairs. But he teaches that the essence of Christ- 
ianity does not lie in things of this kind, not in 
questions of meat and drink, nor of time and place. 
To put these details, however important in their own 
order, on a level with righteousness, mercy, and faith, 
is to bring a snare upon the conscience; it is to 
introduce once more into the Church the leaven of 
justification by works of law. 


“Weak and poor” the best forms of piety become, 
without inward knowledge of God. Liturgies, creeds 
and confessions, church music and _ architecture, 
Sundays, fasts, festivals, are beautiful things when they 
are the transcript of a living faith. When that is gone, 
their charm, their spiritual worth is gone. They no 
longer belong to religion; they have ceased to be a 
bond between the souls of men and God. “ According 
to our faith”—our actual, not professional or “ con-. 
fessional” faith—‘‘it shall be done unto us”: such is 
the rule of Christ. To cling to formularies which have 
lost their meaning and to which the Spirit of truth 
gives no present witness, is a demoralising bondage. 

But this is not the only, nor the commonest way 
in which the sons of God are tempted to return to 
bondage. ‘“ Whosoever committeth sin,” Christ said, 
“is the servant of sin.” And the Apostle will have to 
warn his readers that by their abuse of liberty, by their 
readiness to make it “an occasion to the flesh,” they. 
were likely to forfeit it. ‘They that are Christ’s have 
crucified the flesh” (ch. v. 24). This warning must be 
balanced against the other. Our liberty from outward 
constraint should be still more a liberty from the 
dominion of self, from pride and desire and anger; or 


iv. 8-11.] THE RETURN TO BONDAGE. 271 


it is not the liberty of God’s children. Inward servitude 
is after all the vilest and worst. 


“You make me afraid,” at last the Apostle is com- 
pelled to say, “that I have laboured in vain.” His 
enemies had caused him no such fear. While his 
children in the faith were true to him, he was afraid 
of nothing. ‘Now we live,” he says in one of his 
Epistles, “if ye stand fast in the Lord!” But if they 
should fall away? He trembles for his own work, 
for these wayward children who had already caused 
him so many pangs. It is in a tone of the deepest 
solicitude that he continues his expostulation in the 
following paragraph. 


CHAPTER XVIIL 
PAUL’S ENTREATY, 


**T beseech you, brethren, be as I am, for | am as ye are. Yedidme 
no wrong: but ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I 
preached tke gospel unto you the first time: and that which was a 
temptation to you in my flesh ye despised not, nor rejected ; but ye 
received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. Where then is 
that gratulation of yourselves ? for I bear you witness, that, if possible, 
ye would have plucked out your eyes and given them to me. So then 
am I become your enemy, because I tell you the truth? They zeal- 
ously seek you in no good way ; nay, they desire to shut you out, that 
ye may seek them. But it is good to be zealously sought in a good 
matter at all times, and not only when I am present with you,—my 
children, of whom I am again in travail until Christ be formed in you.* 
Yea, I could wish to be present with you now, and to change my 
voice; for I am perplexed about you.’”"—GAL. iv. 12—20. 


HE reproof of the last paragraph ended in a sigh. 

To see Christ's freemen relapsing into bondage, 
and exchanging their Divine birthright for childish toys 
of ceremonial, what can be more saddening and disap- 
pointing than this? Their own experience of salva- 
tion, the Apostle’s prayers and toils on their behalf, are, 
to all appearance, wasted on these foolish Galatians, 
One resource is still left him. He has refuted and 
anathematized the “other gospel.” He has done what 
explanation and argument can do to set himself right 
with his readers, and to destroy the web of sophistry 





* For the rendering of this clause, see the exposition which follows, 


iv. 12-20,] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 273 
in which their minds had been entangled. He will 
now try to win them by a gentler persuasion. If 
reason and authority fail, ‘for love’s sake he will rather 
beseech” them. 

He had reminded them of their former idolatry ; and 
this calls up to the Apostle’s mind the circumstances 
of his first ministry in Galatia. He sees himself once 
more a stranger amongst this strange people, a traveller 
fallen sick and dependent on their hospitality, preaching 
a gospel with nothing to recommend it in the appear- 
ance of its advocate, and which the sickness delaying 
his journey had compelled him, contrary to his intention, 
to proclaim amongst them. Yet with what 1eady and 
generous hospitality they had received the infirm 
Apostle! Had he been an angel from heaven—nay, 
the Lord Jesus Himself, they could scarcely have shown 
him more attention than they did. His physical weak- 
ness, which would have moved the contempt of others, 
called forth their sympathies. However severely he 
may be compelled to censure them, however much their 
feelings toward him have changed, he will never forget 
the kindness he then received. Surely they cannot 
think him their enemy, or allow him to be supplanted 
by the unworthy rivals who are seeking their regard. 
So Paul pleads with his old friends, and seeks to win 
for his arguments a way to their hearts through the 
affection for himself which he fain hopes is still linger- 
ing there. 

Hoc prudentis est pastoris, Calvin aptly says. But 
there is more in this entreaty than a calculated pru- 
dence. It is a cry of the heart. Paul’s soul is in the 
pangs of travail (ver. 19). We have seen the stern- 
ness of his face relax while he pursues his mighty 
argument. As he surveys the working of God’s 

18 


274 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


counsel in past ages, the promise given to Abraham 
for all nations, the intervening legal discipline, the 
coming of Christ in the fulness of time, the bursting 
of the ancient bonds, the sending forth of the Spirit of 
adoption—and all this for the sake of these Galatian 
Gentiles, and then thinks how they are after all 
declining from grace and renouncing their Divine 
inheritance, the Apostle’s heart aches with grief. 
Foolish, fickle as they have proved, they are his 
children. He will “ travail over them in birth a second 
time,” if “Christ may yet be formed in them.” Per- 
haps he has written too harshly. He half repents of 
his severity.* Fain would he “ change his voice.” If 
he could only ‘“‘be with them,” and see them face to 
face, haply his tears, his entreaties, would win them 
back. A rush of tender emotion wells up in Paul's 
soul. All his relentings are stirred. He is no longer 
the master in Christ rebuking unfaithful disciples; he 
is the mother weeping over her misguided sons. 


There are considerable difficulties in the exegesis 
of this passage. We note them in succession as they 
arise :—(1) In ver. 12 we prefer, with Meyer and 
Lightfoot, to read, “Be as I, for I became (rather than 
am) as. you—brethren, I beseech you.” The verses 
preceding and following both suggest the past tense 
in the ellipsis. Paul’s memory is busy. He appeals 
to the “‘auld lang syne.” He reminds the Galatians of 
what he “had been amongst them for their sake,” fT 
how he then behaved in regard to the matters in dis- 
pute. He assumed no airs of Jewish superiority. He 





* Comp. 2 Cor. ii. 4; vii. 8. 
t¢ Comp. 1 Thess. i. 5; ii. 7, 8. 


iv. 12-20,] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 275 


did not separate himself from his Gentile brethren 
by any practice in which they could not join. He 
“‘became as they,” placing himself by their side on 
the ground of a common Christian faith. He asks for 
reciprocity, for ‘‘a recompense in like kind” (2 Cor. 
vi. 13). Are they going to set themselves above their 
Apostle, to take their stand on that very ground of 
Mosaic privilege which he had abandoned for their 
sake? He implores them not to do this thing. The 
beseechment, in the proper order of the words, comes 
in at the close of the sentence, with a pathetic emphasis. 
He makes himself a suppliant. ‘I beg you,” he says, 
“by our old affection, by our brotherhood in Christ, 
not to desert me thus.” 

(2) Suddenly Paul turns to another point, according 
to his wont in this emotional mood: ‘There is nothing 
in which you have wronged me.” Is he contradicting 
some allegation which had helped to estrange the 
Galatians ? Had some one been saying that Pau 
was affronted by their conduct, and was actuated by 
personal resentment? In that case we should have 
looked for a specific explanation and rebutment of the 
charge. Rather he is anticipating the thought that would 
naturally arise in the minds of his readers at this point. 
“Paul is asking us,” they would say, “to let bygones 
_be bygones, to give up this Judaistic attachment for his 
sake, and to meet him frankly on the old footing. But 
supposing we try to do so, he is very angry with 
us, as this letter shows; he thinks we have treated 
him badly; he will always have a grudge against us. 
Things can never be again as they were between 
ourselves and him.” 

Such feelings often arise upon the breach of an old 
friendship, to prevent the offending party from accept- 


‘ 


276 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


ing the proffered hand of reconciliation. Paul’s protest 
removes this hindrance. He replies, “I have no sense 
of injury, no personal grievance against you. It is 
impossible I should cherish ill-will towards you. You 
know how handsomely you treated me when I first came 
amongst you. Nothing can efface from my heart the 
recollection of that time. You must not think that I 
hate you, because I tell you the truth” (ver. 16). 

(3) ‘‘ Because of an infirmity of the flesh” (physical 
weakness), is the truer rendering of ver. 13; and 
“your temptation in my flesh” the genuine reading 
of ver. 14, restored by the Revisers. Sickness had 
arrested the Apostle’s course during his second mis- 
sionary tour, and detained him in the Galatic country. 
So that he had not only “been with” the Galatians 
“in weakness,” as afterwards when during the same 
journey he preached at Corinth (1 Cor. ii. 3); but 
actually ‘‘ because of weakness.” His infirmities gave 
him occasion to minister there, when he had intended 
to pass them by. 

Paul had no thought of evangelizing Galatia ; 
another goal was in view. It was patent to them— 
indeed he confessed as much at the time—that if he 
had been able to proceed, he would not have lingered 
in their country. This was certainly an unpromising 
introduction. And the Apostle’s state of health made 
it at that time a trial for any one to listen to him. 
There was something in the nature of his malady to 
excite contempt, even loathing for his person. “ That 
which tried you in my flesh, ye did not despise, nor spit 
out:” such is Paul’s vivid phrase. How few men 
would have humility enough to refer to a circumstance 
of this kind; or could do so without loss of dignity. 
He felt that the condition of the messenger might well 


iv. 12-20.] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 277 


have moved this Galatian people to derision, rather 
than to reverence for his message. 

At the best Paul’s appearance and address were 
none of the most prepossessing.* The ‘ugly little 
Jew” M. Renan calls him, repeating the taunts of his 
Corinthian contemners. His sickness in Galatia, con- 
nected, it would appear, with some constitutional weak- 
ness, from which he suffered greatly during his second 
and third missionary tours, assumed a humiliating as 
well as a painful form. Yet this “thorn in the flesh,” 
a bitter trial assuredly to himself, tf had proved at once a 
trial and a blessing to his unintended hearers in Galatia. 

(4) So far from taking offence at Paul’s unfortunate 
condition, they welcomed him with enthusiasm. They 
“blessed themselves” that he had come (ver. 15). They 
said one to another, ‘‘ How fortunate we are in having 
this good man amongst us! What a happy thing for 
us that Paul’s sickness obliged him to stay and give us 
the opportunity of hearing his good news!” Such was 
their former ‘‘gratulation.” The regard they conceived 
for the sick Apostle was unbounded. “ For I bear you 
witness,” he says, ‘that, if possible, you would have 
dug out your eyes and given them me!” 

Is this no more than a strong hyperbole, describing 
the almost extravagant devotion which the Galatians 
expressed to the Apostle? Or are we to read the 
terms more literally? So it has been sometimes sup- 
posed. In this expression some critics have discovered 
a clue to the nature of Paul’s malady. The Galatians, 
as they read the sentence, wished they could have 
taken out their own eyes and given them to Paul, zm 


Sex Corn. 352 Cole iv. 75 X, 1, 10> xi. 6. 


ft Comp 2 Cor. xii. 7—10, referring apparently to the first outbreak 
of this mysterious affliction. 


"7 


278 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


place of his disabled ones. This hypothesis, it is argued, 
agrees with other circumstances of the case and gives 
shape to a number of scattered intimations touching the 
same subject. Infirmity of the eyes would explain the 
“large characters” of Paul’s handwriting (ch. vi. 11), 
and his habit of using anamanuensis. It would account 
for his ignorance of the person of the High Priest at 
his trial in Jerusalem (Acts xxiii. 2—5). The blindness 
that struck him on the way to Damascus may have 
laid the foundation of a chronic affection of this kind, 
afterwards developed and aggravated by the hardships 
of his missionary life. And such an affliction would 
correspond to what is said respecting the “thorn” of 
2 Cor. xii. 7, and the “temptation” of this passage. 
For it would be excessively painful, and at the same 
time disabling and disfiguring in its effects. 

This conjecture has much to recommend it. But it 
finds a very precarious support in the text. Paul 
does not say, “ You would have plucked out your own 
(A.V.) eyes and given them me,” as though he were 
thinking of an exchange of eyes; but, “You would 
have plucked out your eyes and given them me”—as 
much as to say, “ You would have done anything in 
the world for me then,—even taken out your eyes and 
given them to me.”* In the phrase “dug out” we 
may detect a touch of irony. This was the genuine 
Galatian style. The Celtic temperament loves to launch 
itself out in vehemencies and flourishes of this sort. 
These ardent Gauls had been perfectly enraptured with 
Paul. They lavished upon him their most exuberant 
metaphors. They said these things in all sincerity ; 
he “bears them record” to this. However cool they 


* Comp. Matt. xviii. 9. 


iv. 12-20.] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 279 


have become since, they were gushing enough and tc 
spare in their affection towards him then. And now 
have they “so quickly” turned against him? Because 
he crosses their new fancies and tells them unwelcome 
truths, they rush to the opposite extreme and even 
think him their enemy ! 

(5) Suddenly the Apostle turns upon his opposers 
(ver. 17). The Judaizers had disturbed his happy rela- 
tions with his Galatian flock ; they had made them half 
believe that he was their enemy. The Galatians must 
choose between Paul and his traducers. Let them 
scrutinise the motives of these new teachers. Let them 
call to mind the claims of their father in Christ. “They 
are courting you,” he says,—“ these present suitors for 
your regard—dishonourably ; they want to shut you out 
and have you to themselves, that you may pay court to 
them.” They pretend to be zealous for your interests ; 
but it is their own they seek (ch. vi. 12). 

So far the Apostle’s meaning is tolerably clear. But 
ver. 18 is obscure. It may be construed in either of 
two ways, as Paul or the Galatians are taken for the 
subject glanced at in the verb ¢o de courted in its first 
clause: “ But it is honourable to be courted always in 
an honourable way, and not only when I am present 
with you.” Does Paul mean that he has no objection 
to the Galatians making other friends in his absence ? 
or, that he thinks they ought not to forget him in his 
absence ? The latter, as we think. The Apostle com- 
plains of their inconstancy towards himself. This is 
a text for friends and lovers. Where attachment is 
honourable, it should be lasting. ‘Set me as a seal 
upon thine heart,” says the Bride of the Song of Songs. 
With the Galatians it seemed to be, “Out of sight, 
out of mind.” They allowed Paul to be pushed out by 


"4 


280 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





scheming rivals. He was far away; they were on the 
spot. He told them the truth; the Judaizers flattered 

them. So their foolish heads were turned. They 

were positively “bewitched” by these new admirers ; 

and preferred their sinister and designing compliments 

to Paul’s sterling honour and proved fidelity. 

The connection of vv. 17, 18 turns on the words 
honourable and court,* each of which is thrice repeated. 
There is a kind of play on the verb &Aow. In ver. 18 
it implies a true, in ver. 17 a counterfeit affection (an 
affectation). Paul might have said, “It is good one 
should be /oved, followed with affection, always,” but for 
the sake of the verbal antithesis. In ver. 17 he taxes 
his opponents with unworthily courting the favour of 
the Galatians; in ver. 18 he intimates his grief that he 
himself in his absence is no longer courted by them. 

(6) In the next verse this grief of wounded affection, 
checked at first by a certain reserve, breaks out uncon- 
trollably : “My children, for whom again I am in travail, 
till Christ be formed in you!” f This outery is a 
pathetic continuance of his expostulation. He cannot 
bear the thought of losing these children of his heart. 
He stretches out his arms to them. Tears stream from 
his eyes. He has been speaking in measured, almost 
playful terms, in comparing himself with his supplanters. 
But the possibility of their success, the thought of the 
mischief going on in Galatia and of the little power 
he has to prevent it, wrings his very soul. He feels 
a mother’s pangs for his imperilled children, as he 
writes these distressful words. 


* Zndbu, to have zeal towards a person or thing, fo affect (A.V. : in 
its older English sense of seeking, paying regard to any one). 

+ The fu// stop placed in the ¥glish Version at the end of ver. 18, 
on this view, is out of place. 


iv. 12-20.] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 281 





- There is nothing gained by substituting “Tittle chil- 
dren” (John’s phrase) for “ children,” everywhere else 
used by Paul, and attested here by the best witnesses. 
The sentiment is that of 1 Thess. ii. 7, 8; 1 Cor. iv. 
14—16. The Apostle is not thinking of the littleness or 
feebleness of the Galatians, but simply of their relation 
to himself. His sorrow is the sorrow of bereavement. 
‘““You have not many mothers,” he seems to say: “1 
have travailed over you in birth; and now a second 
time you bring on me a mother’s pains, which I must 
endure until Christ is formed in you and His image 
is renewed in your souls,” 


Paul stands before us as an injured friend, a faithful 
minister of Christ robbed of his people’s love. He is 
wounded in his tenderest affections. For the sake of 
the Gentile Churches he had given up everything in 
life that he prized (ver. 12; 1 Cor. ix. 21); he had ex- 
posed himself to the contempt and hatred of his fellow- 
countrymen—and this is his reward, “to be loved the 
less, the more abundantly he loves!” (2 Cor. xii. 15). 

But if he is grieved at this defection, he is equally 
perplexed. He cannot tell what to make of the Gala- 
tions, or in what tone toaddressthem. He has warned, 
denounced, argued, protested, pleaded as a mother with 
her children; still he doubts whether he will prevail. 
If he could only see them and meet them as in former 
days, laying aside the distance, the sternness of authority 
which he has been forced to assume, he might yet 
reach their hearts. At least he would know how matters 
really stand, and in what language he ought to speak 
So his entreaty ends: “I wish I could only be presert 
with you now, and speak in some different voice. For 
I am at a loss to know how to deal with you,” 


282 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


This picture of estrangement and reproach tells its — 
own tale, when its lines have once been clearly marked. 
We may dwell, however, a little longer on some of the 
lessons which it teaches :— 

I. In the first place, it is evident that strong emotions 
and warm affections are no guarantee for the permanence 
of religious life. 

The Galatians resembled the “stony ground” hearers 
of our Lord’s parable,—‘“ such as hear the word, and 
immediately with joy receive it; but they have no root 
in themselves ; they believe for a time.” It was not 
“persecution” indeed that “offended” them; but 
flattery proved equally effectual. They were of the 
same fervid temper as Peter on the night of the Passion, 
when he said, ‘“‘Though I should die with Thee, yet 
will I not deny Thee in anywise,”—within a few hours 
thrice denying his Master, with “oaths and curses.” 
They lacked seriousness and depth. They had fine 
susceptibilities and a large fund of enthusiasm; they 
were full of eloquent protestations ; and under excite- 
ment were capable of great efforts and sacrifices. But 
there was a flaw in their nature. They were creatures 
of impulse—soon hot, soon cold. One cannot help 
liking such people—but as for érusting them, that is 
a different matter. 

Nothing could be more delightful or promising than 
the appearance these Churches presented in the early 
days of their conversion. They heard the Apostle’s 
message with rapt attention; they felt its Divine 
power, so strangely contrasting with his physical 
feebleness. They were amazingly wrought upon. The 
new life in Christ kindled all the fervour of their 
passionate nature. How they triumphed in Christ! 
How they blessed the day when the gospel visited their 


iv. 12-20.] PAUL'S ENTREATY. 283 


land! They almost worshipped the Apostle. They 
could not do enough for him. Their hearts bled for 
his sufferings. Where are all these transports now ? 
Paul is far away. Other teachers have come, with 
“another gospel.” And the cross is already forgotten ! 
They are contemplating circumcision ; they are busy 
studying the Jewish ritual, making arrangements for 
feast-days and “functions”, eagerly discussing points 
ofceremony. Their minds are poisoned with mistrust of 
their own Apostle, whose heart is ready to break over 
their folly and frivolity. All this for the want of a little 
reflection, for want of the steadiness of purpose without 
which the most genial disposition and the most ardent 
emotions inevitably run to waste. Their faith had been 
too much a matter of feeling, too little of principle. 

II. Further, we observe how prone are those who 
have put themselves in the wrong to fix the blame on 
others. 

The Apostle was compelled in fidelity to truth to 
say hard things to his Galatian disciples. He had 
previously, on his last visit, given them a solemn 
warning on account of their Judaic proclivities (ch. i. 9). 
In this Epistle he censures them roundly. He wonders 
at them ; he calls them “senseless Galatians” ; he tells 
them they are within a step of being cut off from 
Christ (ch. v. 4). And now they cry out, ‘ Paul is our 
enemy. If he cared for us, how could he write so 
cruelly! We were excessively fond of him once, we 
could not do too much for him; but that is all over 
now. If we had inflicted on him some great injury, 
he could scarcely treat us more roughly.” Thoughtless 
and excitable people commonly reason in this way. 
Personalities with them take the place of argument 
and principle. The severity of a holy zeal for truth is 


284 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, — 





a thing they can never understand. If you disagree 
with them and oppose them, they put it down to some 
petty animosity. They credit you with a private grudge 
against them ; and straightway enroll you in the number 
of their enemies, though you may be in reality their 
best friend. Flatter them, humour their vanity, and you 
have them at your bidding. Such men itis the hardest 
thing in the world honestly to serve. They will always 
prefer ‘‘the kisses of an enemy” to the faithful “ wounds 
of a friend.” 

III. Men of the Galatian type are the natural prey 
of self-seeking agitators. However sound the principles 
in which they were trained, however true the friendships 
they have enjoyed, they must have change. The 
accustomed palls upon them. Giddy Athenians, they 
love nothing so much as “to hear and tell some new 
thing.” They ostracize Aristides, simply because they 
are “‘tired of hearing him always called the Just.” To 
hear “the same things,” however ‘‘safe” it may be, 
even from an Apostle’s lips is to them intolerably 
“grievous.” They never think earnestly and patiently 
encugh to find the deeper springs, the fresh delight 
and satisfaction lying hidden in the great unchanging 
truths. These are they who are “carried about with 
divers and strange doctrines,” who run after the newest 
thing in ritualistic art, or sensational evangelism, or 
well-spiced heterodoxy. Truth and plain dealing, 
apostolic holiness and godly sincerity, are outmatched 
in dealing with them by the craft of worldly wisdom. 
A little judicious flattery, something to please the eye 
and catch the fancy —and they are persuaded to believe 
almost anything, or to deny what they have most 
earnestly believed. 

What had the Legalists to offer compared with the 


iv. 12-20.] PAUL’S ENTREATY. 285 


gifts bestowed on these Churches through Paul? What 
was there that could make them rivals to him in 
character or spiritual power? And yet the Galatians 
flock round the Judaist teachers, and accept without 
inquiry their slanders and perversions of the gospel ; 
while the Apostle, their true friend and father, too true 
to spare their faults, stands suspected, almost deserted. 
He must forsooth implore them to come down from the 
heights of their would-be legal superiority, and to meet 
him on the common ground of grace and saving faith. 
The sheep will not hear their shepherd’s voice; they 
follow strangers, though they be thieves and hirelings. 
“O foolish Galatians !” 


Whether the Apostle’s entreaty prevailed to recall 
them or did not, we cannot tell. From the silence with 
which these Churches are passed over in the Acts of the 
Apostles, and the little that is heard of them afterwards, 
an unfavourable inference appears probable. The 
Judaistic leaven, it is to be feared, went far to leaven 
the whole lump. Paul’s apprehensions were only too 
well-grounded. And these hopeful converts who had 
once “run well,” were fatally ‘‘ hindered” and fell far 
behind in the Christian race. Such, in all likelihood, 
was the result of the departure from the truth of the 
gospel into which the Galatians allowed themselves to 
be drawn. 

Whatever was the sequel to this story, Paul’s protest 
remains to witness to the sincerity and tenderness cf 
the great Apostle’s soul, and to the disastrous issues 
of the levity of character which distinguished his 
Galatian disciples, 





CHAPTER XIX. 
THE STORY OF HAGAR. 


“Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? 
For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, one by the handmaid, 
and one by the freewoman. Howbeit the som by the handmaid is born 
after the flesh ; but the som by the freewoman zs dorm through promise. 
Which things contain an allegory : for these women are two covenants ; 
one from mount Sinai, bearing children unto bondage, which is Hagar. 
For Sinai is a mountain in Arabia, and answereth to the Jerusalem 
that now is: for she is in bondage with herchildren. But the Jerusalem 
that is above is free, which is our mother. For it is written, 


Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not ; 

Break forth and cry, thou that travailest not : 

For more are the children of the desolate than of her which 
hath the husband. 


Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are children of promise. But as 
then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him ‘hat was born after 
the Spirit, even so it is now. Howbeit what saith the scripture? Cast 
out the handmaid and her son ; for the son of the handmaid shall not 
inherit with the son of the freewoman. Wherefore, brethren, we are 
not children of a handmaid, but of the freewoman. For freedom did 
Christ set us free : stand fast therefore, and be not entangled again in 
a yoke of bondage.” —GAL. iv, 2I—v, I. 


HE Apostle wished that he could “change his 
voice” (ver. 20). Indeed he has changed it more 

than once. ‘Any one who looks closely may see that 
there is much change and alteration of feeling in what 
the Apostle has previously written” (Theodorus). 


iv, 21-v. 1.] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 287 


Now he will try another tone; he proceeds in fact to 
address his readers in a style which we find nowhere 
else in his Epistles. He will tell his “children” a 
story! Perhaps he may thus succeed better than by 
graver argument. ‘Their quick fancy will readily appre- 
hend the bearing of the illustration; it may bring home 
to them the force of his doctrinal contention, and the 
peril of their own position, as he fears they have not 
seen them yet. And so, after the pathetic appeal of the 
last paragraph, and before he delivers his decisive, 
official protest to the Galatians against their circum- 
cision, he interjects this “allegory” of the two sons of 
Abraham. 

Paul cites the history of the sons of Abraham. No 
other example would have served his purpose. The 
controversy between himself and the Judaizers turned 
on the question, Who are the true heirs of Abraham ? 
(ch. iii. 7, 16, 29). He made faith in Christ, they cir- 
cumcision and law-keeping, the ground of sonship. So 
the inheritance was claimed in a double sense. But 
now, if it should appear that this antithesis existed in 
' principle in the bosom of the patriarchal family, if we 
should find that there was an elder son of Abraham's 
flesh opposed to the child of promise, how powerfully 
will this analogy sustain the Apostle’s position. 
Judaism will then be seen to be playing over again the 
part of Ishmael; and “the Jerusalem that now is” takes 
the place of Hagar, the slave-mother. The moral 
situation created by the Judaic controversy had been 
rehearsed in the family life of Abraham. 

“Tell me,” the Apostle asks, ‘“ you that would fain 
be subject to the law, do you not know what it relates 
concerning Abraham? He had two sons, one of free, 
and the other of servile birth. Do you wish to belong 


— 


288 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





to the line of Ishmael, or Isaac?” In this way Paul 
resumes the thread of his discourse dropped in ver. 7. 
Faith, he had told his readers, had made them sons of 
God. They were, in Christ, of Abraham's spiritual 
seed, heirs of his promise. God had sent His Son to 
redeem them, and the Spirit of His Son to attest their 
adoption. But they were not content. They were 
ambitious of Jewish privileges. The Legalists per- 
suaded them that they must be circumcised and conform 
to Moses, in order to be Abraham’s children in full 
title. ‘Very well,” the Apostle says, “you may be- 
come Abraham’s sons in this fashion. Only you must 
observe that Abraham had ¢wo sons. And the Law 
will make you his sons by Hagar, whose home is Sinai 
—not Israelites, but Jshmaelites !” 

Paul’s Galatian allegory has greatly exercised the 
minds of his critics. The word is one of ill repute in 
exegesis. Allegory was the instrument of Rabbinical 
and Alexandrine Scripturists, an infallible device for 
extracting the predetermined sense from the letter of 
the sacred text. The “ spiritualising” of Christian in- 


terpreters has been carried, in many instances, to equal ~ 


excess of riot. For the honest meaning of the word of 
God anything and everything has been substituted that 
lawless fancy and verbal ingenuity could read into it. 
The most arbitrary and grotesque distortions of the 
facts of Scripture have passed current under cover of 
the clause, ‘‘ which things are an allegory.” But Paul’s 
allegory, and that of Philo and the Allegorical school, 
are very different things, as widely removed as the 
“words of truth and soberness” from the intoxications 
of a mystical idealism. 

With Paul the spiritual sense of Scripture is based 
on the historical, is in fact the moral content and import 


iv. 21-v. 1.] THE STORY OF HAGAR 289 
thereof; for he sees in history a continuous manifesta- 
tion of God’s will. With the Allegorists the spiritual 
sense, arrived at by @ priori means, replaces the histori- 
cal, destroyed to make room for it. The Apostle points 
out in the story of Hagar a spiritual intent, such as 
exists in every scene of human life if we had eyes to 
see it, something other than the literal relation of the 
facts, but nowise alien from it. Here lies the difference 
between legitimate and illegitimate allegory. The 
utmost freedom may be given to this employment of 
the imagination, so long as it is true to the moral of 
the narrative which it applies. In principle the Pauline 
allegory does not differ from the type. In the type 
the correspondence of the sign and thing signified 
centres in a single figure or event; in such an allegory ~ 
as this it is extended to a group of figures and a series 
of events. But the force of the application depends on 
the actuality of the original story, which in the illicit 
allegory is matter of indifference. 

“Which things are allegorized”—so the Apostle 
literally writes in ver. 24—made matters of allegory. 
The phrase intimates, as Bishop Lightfoot suggests, 
that the Hagarene episode in Genesis (ch. xvi., xxi. 
I—2I1) was commonly interpreted in a figurative way. 
The Galatians had heard from their Jewish teachers 
specimens of this popular mode of exposition. Paul 
will employ it too ; and will give his own reading of the 
famous story of Ishmael and Isaac. Philo of Alexan- 
dria, the greatest allegorist of the day, has expounded 
the same history. These eminent interpreters both 
make Sarah the mother of the spiritual, Hagar of the 
worldly offspring; both point out how the barren is 
exalted over the fruitful wife. So far, we may imagine, 
Paul is moving on the accepted lines of Jewish exegesis. 


IQ 


290 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 








But Philo knows nothing of the correspondence between 
Isaac and Christ, which lies at the back of the Apostle’s 
allegory. And there is this vital difference of method 
between the two divines, that whereas Paul’s com- 
parison is the illustration of a doctrine proved on other 
grounds—the painting which decorates the house 
already built (Luther)—with the Alexandrine idealist it 
forms the substance and staple of his teaching. 

Under this allegorical dress the Apostle expounds 
once more his doctrine, already inculcated, of the differ- 
ence between the Legal and Christian state. The 
former constitutes, as he now puts the matter, a bastard 
sonship like that of Ishmael, conferring only an 
external and provisional tenure in the Abrahamic in- 
heritance. It is contrasted with the spiritual sonship 
of the true Israel in the following respects :—It is a 
state of nature as opposed to grace; of bondage as 
opposed to freedom; and further, it is femporary and 
soon to be ended by the Divine decree. 

I. “ He who is of the maid-servant is after the flesh ; 
but he that is of the free-woman is through promise. 
. . . Just as then he that was after the flesh persecuted 
him that was after the Spirit, so now” (vv. 23, 29). 
The Apostle sees in the different parentage of Abraham's 
sons the ground of a radical divergence of character. 
One was the child of nature, the other was the son of 
a spiritual faith. 

Ishmael was in truth the fruit of unbelief; his birth 
was due to a natural but impatient misreading of the 
promise. The patriarch’s union with Hagar was ill- 
assorted and ill-advised. It brought its natural penalty 
by introducing an alien element into his family life. 
The low-bred insolence which the serving-woman, in 
the prospect of becoming a mother, showed toward 


v.20-v. 1] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 291 


the mistress to whom she owed her preferment, gave 
a foretaste of the unhappy consequences. The promise 
of posterity made to Abraham with a childless wife, 
was expressly designed to try his faith; and he had 
allowed it to be overborne by the reasonings of nature. 
It was no wonder that the son of the Egyptian slave, 
born under such conditions, proved to be of a lower 
type, and had to be finally excluded from the house. 

In Ishmael’s relation to his father there was nothing 
but the ordinary play of human motives. “The son 
of the handmaid was born after the flesh.” He was 
a natural son. But Ishmael was not on that account 
cut off from the Divine mercies. Nor did his father’s 
prayer, ‘“‘O that Ishmael might live before Thee” 
(Gen. xvii. 18), remain unanswered. A great career 
was reserved by Divine Providence for his race. The 
Arabs, the fiery sons of the desert, through him claim 
descent from Abraham. They have carved their 
name deeply upon the history and the faith of the 
world. But sensuousness and lawlessness are every- 
where the stamp of the Ishmaelite. With high gifts and 
some generous qualities, such as attracted to his eldest 
boy the love of Abraham, their fierce animal passion 
has been the curse of the sons of Hagar. Mohamme- 
danism is a bastard Judaism; it is the religion of 
Abraham sensualised. Ishmael stands forth as the 
type of the carnal man. On outward grounds of flesh 
and blood he seeks inheritance in the kingdom of 
God ; and with fleshly weapons passionately fights its 
battles. 

To a similar position Judaism, in the Apostle’s view, 
had now reduced itself. And to this footing the Gala- 
tian Churches would be brought if they yielded to the 
Judaistic solicitations. To be circumcised would be for 


292 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








them to be born again after the flesh, to link them- 
selves to Abraham in the unspiritual fashion of Hagar’s 
son. Ishmael was the first to be circumcised (Gen. 
xvii. 23—26). It was to renounce salvation by faith 
and the renewing of the Holy Spirit. This course 
could only have one result. The Judaic ritualism they 
were adopting would bear fruit after its kind, in a 
worldly, sensuous life. Like Ishmael they would 
claim kinship with the Church of God on fleshly 
grounds; and their claim must prove as futile as did 
his. 

The persecution of the Church by Judaism gave 
proof of the Ishmaelite spirit, the carnal animus by 
which it was possessed. A religion of externalism 
naturally becomes repressive. It knows not “ the 
demonstration of the Spirit”; it has “confidence in 
the flesh.” It relies on outward means for the propa- 
gation of its faith; and naturally resorts to the secular 
arm. The Inquisition and the Auto-da-fé are a not 
unfitting accompaniment of the gorgeous ceremonial of 
the Mass. Ritualism and priestly autocracy go hand 
in hand. “So now,” says Paul, pointing to Ishmael’s 
“persecution” of the infant Isaac, hinted at in Gen. 
xxi, 8—I0. 

The laughter of Hagar’s boy at Sarah’s weaning- 
feast seems but a slight offence to be visited with the 
punishment of expulsion; and the incident one beneath 
the dignity of theological argument. But the principle 
for which Paul contends is there; and it is the more 
casily apprehended when exhibited on this homely 
scale. The family is the germ and the mirror of 
society. In it are first called into play the motives 
which determine the course of history, the rise and fall 
of empires or churches. ‘The gravamen of the charge 


iv. 21-v, 1] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 293 
against Ishmael lies in the last word of Gen. xxi. 9, 
rendered in the Authorized Version mocking, and by 
the Revisers playing, after the Septuagint and the 
Vulgate. This word in the Hebrew is evidently a play 
on the name Jsaac, 1.e., Jaughter, given by Sarah to her 
boy with genial motherly delight (vv. 6, 7). Ishmael, 
now a youth of fourteen, takes up the child’s name and 
turns ‘it, on this public and festive occasion, into 
ridicule. Such an act was not only an insult to the 
mistress of the house and the young heir at a most 
untimely moment, it betrayed a jealousy and con- 
tempt on the part of Hagar’s son towards his half- 
brother which gravely compromised Isaac’s future. 
“The wild, ungovernable and pugnacious character 
ascribed to his descendants began to display itself in 
Ishmael, and to appear in language of provoking 
insolence ; offended at the comparative indifference 
with which he was treated, he indulged in mockery, 
especially against Isaac, whose very name furnished 
him with satirical sneers.”* Ishmael’s jest cost him 
dear. The indignation of Sarah was reasonable ; and 
Abraham was compelled to recognise in her demand 
the voice of God (vv. 10—12). The two boys, like 
Esau and Jacob in the next generation, represented 
opposite principles and ways of life, whose counter- 
working was to run through the course of fitture 
history. Their incompatibility was already mani- 
fest. 

The Apostle’s comparison must have been mortifying 
in the extreme to the Judaists. They are told in plain 
terms that they are in the position of outcast Ishmael; 
while uncircumcised Gentiles, without a drop of Abra- 


* Kalisch, Commentary, on Genesis xxi. 9. 


264 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





ham’s blood in their veins, have received the promise 
forfeited by their unbelief. Paul could not have put 
his conclusion in a form more unwelcome to Jewish 
pride. But without this radical exposure of the legal- 
ist position it was impossible for him adequately to 
vindicate his gospel and defend his Gentile children in 
the faith. 

II. From this contrast of birth “ according to. flesh” 
and “through promise” is deduced the opposition 
between the slave-born and free-born sons. “For these 
(the slave-mother and the free-woman) are two cove- 
nants, one indeed bearing children unto bondage— 
which is Hagar” (ver. 24). The other side of the 
antithesis is not formally expressed; it is obvious. 
Sarah the princess, Abraham’s true wife, has her 
counterpart in the original covenant of promise re- 
newed in Christ, and in ‘the Jerusalem above, which 
is our mother” (ver. 26). Sarah is the typical mother,* 
as Abraham is the father of the children of faith. In 
the systoichia, or tabular comparison, which the Apostle 
draws up after the manner of the schools, Hagar and 
the Mosatc covenant, Sinai and the Jerusalem that now is 
stand in one file and “answer to” each other; Sarah 
and the Abrahamic covenant, Zion and the heavenly 
¥erusalem succeed in the same order, opposite to them. 
“ Zion” is wanting in the second file ; but “Sinai and 
Zion” form a standing antithesis (Heb. xii. 18—22); 
‘the second is implied in the first. It was to Zion that 
the words of Isaiah cited in ver. 27, were addressed. 

The first clause of ver. 25 is best understood in the 
shorter, marginal reading of the R. V., also preferred 
by Bishop Lightfoot (70 yap Yuva dpos eoriv x.7.r.). It 


* Comp. Heb. xi. 11, 12; 1 Pet. iii. 6. 


v. 2I-v. 1.] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 295 





is a parenthesis—“ for mount Sinai* is in Arabia ”"— 
covenant running on in the mind from ver. 24 as the 
continued subject of ver. 25 6: “and it answereth to 
the present Jerusalem.” This is the simplest and most 
consistent construction of the passage. The interjected 
geographical reference serves to support the identifica- 
tion of the Sinaitic covenant with Hagar, Arabia being 
the well-known abode of the Hagarenes. Paul had 
met them in his wanderings there. Some scholars 
have attempted to establish a verbal agreement between 
the name of the slave-mother and that locally given to 
the Sinaitic range ; but this explanation is precarious, 
and after all unnecessary. There was a real corre- 
spondence between place and people on the one 
hand, as between place and covenant on the other. 
Sinai formed a visible and imposing link between the 
race of Ishmael and the Mosaic law-giving. That 
awful, desolate mountain, whose aspect, as we can 
imagine, had vividly impressed itself on Paul’s memory 
(ch. i. 17), spoke to him of bondage and terror. It 
was a true symbol of the working of the law of Moses, 
exhibited in the present condition of Judaism. And 
round the base of Sinai Hagar’s wild sons had found 
their dwelling. 

Jerusalem was no longer the mother of freemen. 
The boast, ‘‘ we are Abraham’s sons; we were never in 
bondage” (John viii. 33), was an unconscious irony. 
Her sons chafed under the Roman yoke. They were 
loaded with self-inflicted legal burdens. Above all, 
they were, notwithstanding their professed law-keepinhg, 
enslaved to sin, in servitude to their pride and evil 





* Paul writes “‘the Szzaz mountain” (7d Zw spos) in tacit opposi- 
tion to the other, familiar M/ozunt Zion (Hofmann zx Joc.). In Heb. 
xii. 22 the same inversion appears, with the same significance. 


296 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


lusts. The spirit of the nation was that of rebellious, 
discontented slaves. They were Ishmaelite sons of 
Abraham, with none of the nobleness, the reverence, 
the calm and elevated faith of their father. In the 
Judaism of the Apostle’s day the Sinaitic dispensation, 
uncontrolled by the higher patriarchal and prophetic 
faith, had worked out its natural result. It “gendered 
to bondage.” A system of repression and routine, it 
had produced men punctual in tithes of mint and anise, 
but without justice, mercy, or faith; vaunting their 
liberty while they were “ servants of corruption.” 
The law of Moses could not form a “new creature.” 
It left the Ishmael of nature unchanged at heart, a 
child of the flesh, with whatever robes of outward 
decorum his nakedness was covered. The Pharisee 
was the typical product of law apart from grace. 
Under the garb of a freeman he carried the soul of a 
slave. 

But ver. 26 sounds the note of deliverance: “The 
Jerusalem above is free; and she is our mother!” 
Paul has escaped from the prison of Legalism, from the 
confines of Sinai; he has left behind the perishing 
earthly Jerusalem, and with it the bitterness and gloom 
of his Pharisaic days. He is a citizen of the heavenly 
Zion, breathing the air of a Divine freedom. The 
yoke is broken from the neck of the Church of God ; 
the desolation is gone from her heart. There come to 
the Apostle’s lips the words of the great prophet of the 
Exile, depicting the deliverance of the spiritual Zion, 
despised and counted barren, but now to be the mother 
of a numberless offspring. In Isaiah’s song, “ Rejoice, 
thou barren that bearest not” (ch. liv.), the laughter of 
the childless Sarah bursts forth again, to be gloriously 
renewed in the persecuted Church of Jesus. Robbed 


iv. 21-v. 1] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 297 





of all outward means, mocked and thrust out as she 
is by Israel after the flesh, her rejection is a release, 
an emancipation. Conscious of the Spirit of sonship 
and freedom, looking out on the boundless conquests 
lying before her in the Gentile world, the Church of 
the New Covenant glories in her tribulations. In Paul 
is fulfilled the joy of prophet and psalmist, who sang 
in former days of gloom concerning Israel’s enlarge- 
ment and world-wide victories. No legalist could 
understand words like these. ‘The veil” was upon 
his heart ‘in the reading of the Old Testament.” But 
with “the Spirit of the Lord” comes “liberty.” The 
prophetic inspiration has returned. The voice of re- 
joicing is heard again in the dwellings of Israel. “ If 
the Son make you free,” said Jesus, ‘‘ ye shall be free 
indeed.” This Epistle proves it. 

III. “ And the bondman adideth not in the house for 
ever ; the Son abideth for ever” (John viii. 35). This 
also the Lord had testified: the Apostle repeats His 
warning in the terms of this allegory. 

Sooner or later the slave-boy was bound to go. He 
has no proper birthright, no permanent footing in the 
house. One day he exceeds his licence, he makes 
himself intolerable ; he must begone. ‘ What saith the 
Scripture? Cast out the maidservant and her son; 
for the son of the maidservant shall not inherit with 
the son of the freewoman” (ver. 30). Paul has pro- 
nounced the doom of Judaism. His words echo those 
of Christ: “Behold your house is left unto you deso- 
late” (Matt. xxiii. 38); they are taken up again in 
the language of Heb. xiii. 13, 14, uttered on the eve 
of the fall of Jerusalem: ‘‘Let us go forth unto Jesus 
without the camp, bearing His reproach. We have 
here no continuing city, but we seek that which is to 


298 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


come.” On the walls of Jerusalem ichabod was plainly 
written. Since it “crucified our Lord” it was no 
longer the Holy City ; it was “spiritually Sodom and 
Egypt” (Rev. xi. 8),—£gypt, the country of Hagar. 
Condemning Him, the Jewish nation passed sentence 
on itself. They were slaves who in blind rage slew 
heir Master when He came to free them. 

The Israelitish people showed more than Ishmael’s 
jealousy towards the infant Church of the Spirit. No 
weapon of violence or calumny was too base to be 
used against it. The cup of their iniquity was filling 
fast. They were ripening for the judgement which 
Christ predicted (1 Thess. ii. 16). Year by year they 
became more hardened against spiritual truth, more 
malignant towards Christianity, and more furious and 
fanatical in their hatred towards their civil rulers. The 
cause of Judaism was hopelessly lost. In Rom. ix.— 
xi., written shortly after this Epistle, Paul assumes this 
as a settled thing, which he has to account for and to 
reconcile with Scripture. In the demand of Sarah for 
the expulsion of her rival, complied with by Abraham 
against his will, the Apostle reads the secret judgement 
of the Almighty on the proud city which he himself so 
ardently loved, but which had crucified his Lord and 
repented not. “Cut it down,” Jesus cried; ‘“ why 
cumbereth it the ground?” (Luke xiii. 7). The voice 
of Scripture speaks again: “Cast her out; she and 
her sons are slaves. They have no place amongst 
the sons of God.” Ishmael was in the way of Isaac’s 
safety and prosperity. And the Judaic ascendency was 
no less a danger to the Church. The blow which 
shattered Judaism,.at once cleared the ground for the 
outward progress of the gospel and arrested the 
legalistic reaction which hindered its internal develop- 


iv. 2I-v. 1] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 299 


ment. The two systems were irreconcilable. It was 
Paul’s merit to have first apprehended this contradiction 
in its full import. The time had come to apply in all its 
rigour Christ’s principle of combat, ‘ He that is not with 
Me, is against Me.” It°is the same rule of exclusion 
which Paulannounces: “ If any man hath not the Spirit 
of Christ, he is none of His” (Rom. viii. 9). Out of Christ 
is no salvation. When the day of judgement comes, 
whether for nien or nations, this is the touchstone: 
Have we, or have we not “ the Spirit of God’s Son ?” 
Is our character that of sons of God, or slaves of sin ? 
On the latter falls inevitably the sentence of expulsion, 
“He will gather out of His kingdom all things that 
offend, and them that do iniquity” (Matt. xiii. 41). 

This passage signalises the definite breach of Christ- 
anity with Judaism. The elder Apostles lingered in 
the porch of the Temple ; the primitive Church clung 
to the ancient worship. Paul does not blame them for 
doing so. In their case this was but the survival of 
a past order, in principle acknowledged to be obsolete. 
But the Church of the future, the spiritual seed of 
Abraham gathered out of all nations, had no part in 
Legalism. The Apostle bends all his efforts to con- 
vince his readers of this, to make them sensible of 
the impassable gulf lying between them and outworn 
Mosaism. Again he repeats, ‘‘ We are not children 
of a maidservant, but of her that is free” (ver. 31). 
The Church of Christ can no more hold fellowship with 
Judaism than could Isaac with the spiteful, mocking 
Ishmael. Paul leads the Church across the Rubicon. 
There is no turning back. 

Ver. I of ch. v. is the application of the allegory. It 
is a triumphant assertion of liberty, a ringing summons 
to its defence. Its separation from ch. iv. is ill-judged, 





300 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS.* 





and runs counter to the ancient divisions of the 
Epistle. ‘Christ set us free,” Paul declares; “and it 
was for freedom*—not that we might fall under a new 
servitude. S/and fast therefore; do not let your- 
selves be made bondmen over again.” Bondmen the 
Galatians had been before (ch. iv. 8), bowing down to 
false and vile gods. Bondmen they will be again, if 
they are beguiled by the Legalists to accept the yoke 
of circumcision, if they take “the Jerusalem that now 
is” for their mother. They have tasted the joys of 
freedom ; they know what it is to be sons of God, heirs 
of His kingdom and partakers of His Spirit; why do 
they stoop from their high estate? Why should 
Christ’s freemen put a yoke upon their own neck ? Let 
them only know their happiness and security in Christ, 
and refuse to be cheated out of the substance of their 
spiritual blessings by the illusive shadows which the 
Judaists offer them. Freedom once gained is a prize 
never to be lost. No care, no vigilance in its preserva- 
tion can be too great. Such liberty inspires courage 
and good hope in its defence. ‘Stand fast therefore. 
Quit yourselves like men.” 


How the Galatians responded to the Apostle’s 
* The reading of this clause is doubtful. The ancient witnesses 
disagree. Dr. Hort suggests that the Revised reading—the best at- 
tested, but scarcely grammatical—may be due to a primitive corruption, 
TH for EIL (éXevéepig). This emendation gives an excellent and 
apposite sense: for (with a view to) freedom Christ set us free. The 
phrase ém’ é\ev@epia is found in ver. 13, and would gain additional 
force there, if read as a repetition of what is affirmed here. The con- 
fusion of letters involved is a natural one ; and once made at an carly 
time in some standard copy, it would account for the extraordinary 
confusion of reading into which the verse has fallen. If conjectural 
emendation may be admitted anywhere in the N. T,, it is legitimate in 
this instance. 


iv. 21-v. 1.] THE STORY OF HAGAR. 301 


challenge, we do not know. But it has found an echo 
in many a heart since. The Lutheran Reformation 
was an answer to it; so was the Scottish Covenant. 
The spirit of Christian liberty is eternal. Jerusalem or 
Rome may strive to imprison it. They might as well 
seek to bind the winds of heaven. Its home is with 
God. Its seat is the throne of Christ. It lives by 
the breath of His Spirit. The earthly powers mock 
at it, and drive it into the wilderness. They do but 
assure their own ruin. It leaves the house of the 
oppressor desolate. Whosoever he be—Judaist or 
Papist, priest, or king, or demagogue—that makes 
himself lord of God’s heritage and would despoil His 
children of the liberties of faith, let him beware lest 
of him also it be spoken, “Cast out the bondwoman 
and her son.” 





CHAPTER XX. 
SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED 


“ Behold, I Paul say unto you, that, if ye receive circumcision, Christ 
will profit you nothing. Yea, I testify again to every man that receiveth 
circumcision, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Ye are severed 
from Christ, ye who would be justified by the law; ye are fallen away 
from grace. For we through the Spirit by faith wait for the hope 
of righteousness. For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth 
anything, nor uncircumcision; but faith working through love.”— 
GAL. v. 2—6. 


HALL the Galatians be circumcised, or shall they 

not? This is the decisive question. The denun- 
ciation with which Paul begins his letter, the narrative 
which follows, the profou and rgumentation, the tender 
entreaty of the last two chapters, all converge toward 
this crucial point. So far the Galatian Churches had 
been only dallying with Judaism. They have been 
tempted to the verge of apostasy; but they are not 
yet over the edge. Till they consent to be circumcised, 
they have not finally committed themselves; their 
freedom is not absolutely lost. The Apostle still hopes, - 
despite his fears, that they will stand fast (ver. 10; 
ch. iv. 11; iii. 4). The fatal step is eagerly pressed 
on them by the Judaizers (ch. vi. 12, 13), whose per- 
suasion the Galatians had so far entertained, that they 
had begun to keep the Hebrew sabbath and feast-days 
(ch. iv. 10). If they yield to this further demand, the 
battle is lost; and this powerful Epistle, with all the 


v.26.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 303 


Apostle’s previous labour spent upon them, has been 
in vain. To sever this section from the polemical in 
order to attach it to the practical part of the Epistle, 
as many commentators do, is to cut the nerve of the 
Apostle’s argument and reduce it to an abstract 
theological discussion. 

This momentous question is brought forward with 
the greater emphasis and effect, because it has hitherto 
been kept out of sight. The allusion to Titus in 
ch. ii. I—5 has already indicated the supreme import- 
ance of the matter of circumcision. But the Apostle 
has delayed dealing with it formally and directly, until 
he is able to do so with the weight of the foregoing 
chapters to support his interdict. He has shattered 
the enemies’ position with kis artillery of logic, he has 
assailed the hearts of his readers with all the force of 
his burning indignation and subduing pathos. Now 
he gathers up his strength for the final charge home, 
which must decide the battle. 

I. Lo, I Paut TELL you! When he begins thus, 
we feel that the decisive moment is at hand. Every- 
thing depends on the next few words. Paul stands 
like an archer with his bow drawn at full stretch 
and the arrow pointed to the mark. ‘Let others 
say what they may; this is what J tell you. If 
my word has any weight with you, give heed to this: 
—IF YOU BE CIRCUMCISED, CHRIST WILL PROFIT YOU 
NOTHING.” 

Now his bolt is shot; we see what the Apostle has 
had in his mind all this time. Language cannot be 
more explicit. Some of his readers will have failed to 
catch the subtler points of his argument, or the finer 
tones of his voice of entreaty ; but every one will under- 
stand this. The most “senseless” and volatile 


304 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





amongst the Galatians will surely be sobered by the 
terms of this warning. There is no escaping the 
dilemma. Legalism and Paulinism, the true and the 
false gospel, stand front to front, reduced to their barest 
form, and weighed each in the balance of its practical 
result. Christ—or Circumcision: which shall it be? 

This declaration is no less authoritative and judicially 
threatening than the anathema of ch.ii That former 
denouncement declared the false teachers severed from 
Christ. Those who yield to their persuasion, will be 
also “‘severed from Christ.” They will fall into the 
same ditch as their blind leaders. The Judaizers have 
forfeited their part in Christ; they are false brethren, 
tares among the wheat, troublers and hinderers to the 
Church of God. And Gentile Christians who choose 
to be led astray by them must take the consequences. 
If they obey the “other gospel,” Christ’s gospel is 
theirs no longer. If they rest their faith on circum- 
cision, they have withdrawn it from His cross. Adopt- 
ing the Mosaic regimen, they forego the benefits of 
Christ’s redemption. “ Christ will profit you nothing.” 
The sentence is negative, but no less fearful on that 
account. It is as though Christ should say, “ Thou 
hast no part with Me.” 

Circumcision will cost the Galatian Christians all 
they possess in Jesus Christ. But is not this, some 
one will ask, an over-strained assertion? Is it con- 
sistent with Paul's professions and his policy in other 
instances? In ver. 6, and again in the last chapter, 
he declares that ‘‘Circumcision is nothing, and uncir- 
cumcision nothing”; and yet here he makes it every- 
thing! The Apostle’s position is this. In itself the 
rite is valueless. It was the sacrament of the Old 
Covenant, which was brought to an end by the death 


v.2-6.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED! 305 


of Christ. For the new Church of the Spirit, it is a 
matter of perfect indifference whether a man is circum- 
cised or not. Paul had therefore circumcised Timothy, 
whose mother was a Jewess (Acts xvi. I—3), though 
neither he nor his young disciple supposed that it was 
a religious necessity. It was done as a social con- 
venience ; “ uncircumcision was nothing,” and could in 
such a case be surrendered without prejudice. On the 
other hand, he refused to submit Titus to the same 
rite ; for he was a pure Greek, and on him it could only 
have been imposed on religious grounds and as a 
passport to salvation. For this, and for no other reason, 
it was demanded by the Judaistic party. In this instance 
it was needful to show that ‘circumcision is nothing.” 
The Galatians stood in the same position as Titus. 
Circumcision, if performed on them, must have denoted, 
not as in Timothy's case, the fact of Jewish birth, 
but subjection to the Mosatc law. Regarded in this 
light, the question was one of life or death for the 
Pauline Churches. To yield to the Judaizers would 
be to surrender the principle of salvation by faith. 
The attempt of the legalist party was in effect to force 
Christianity into the grooves of Mosaism, to reduce the 
world-wide Church of the Spirit to a sect of moribund 
Judaism. 

With what views, with what aim were the Galatians 
entertaining this Judaic “persuasion” ?. Was it to 
make them sons of God and heirs of His kingdom ? 
This was the object with which “God sent forth His 
Son;” and the Spirit of sonship assured them that it 
was realised (ch. iv. 4—7). To adopt the former means 
to this end was to renounce the latter. In turning 
their eyes to this new bewitchment, they must be con- 
scious that their attention was diverted from the 


20 


306 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Redeemer’s cross and their confidence in it weakened 
(ch. iii. 1). To be circumcised would be to rest their 
salvation forr “lly and definitely on works of law, in 
place of the grace of God. The consequences of this 
Paul has shown in relating his discussion with Peter, 
in ch. ii. 15—21. They would “make” themselves 
“transgressors ;” they would ‘make Christ's death of 
none effect.” In the soul’s salvation Christ will be 
all, or nothing. If we trust Him, we must trust Him 
altogether. The Galatians had already admitted a 
suspicion of the power of His grace, which if cherished 
and acted on in the way proposed, must sever all 
communion between their souls and Him. Their cir- 
cumcision would be “the sacrament of their excision 
from Christ” (Huxtable). 

The tense of the verb is present. Paul's readers may 
be in the act of making this disastrous compliance. 
He bids them look for a moment at the depth of the 
gulf on whose brink they stand. “Stop!” he cries, 
“another step in that direction, and you have lost 
Christ.” 

And what will they get in exchange? They will 
saddle themselves with all the obligations of the Mosaic 
law (ver. 3). This probably was more than they 
bargained for. They wished to find a via media, some 
compromise between the new faith and the old, which 
would secure to them the benefits of Christ without 
His reproach, and the privileges of Judaism without 
its burdens. This at least was the policy of the Judaic 
teachers (ch. vi. 12, 13). But it was a false and 
untenable position. ‘Circumcision verily profiteth, 7f 
thou art a doer of the law” (Rom. ii. 25); otherwise it 
brings only condemnation. He who receives the sacra- 
ment of Mosaism, by doing so pledges himself to “keep 


v.2-6.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 307 


and do” every one of its “ordinances, statutes, and 
judgements”—a yoke which, honest Peter said, “‘ Neither 
we nor our fathers were able to bear” (Acts xv. I0). 
Let the Galatians read the law, and consider what they 
are going to undertake. He who goes with the Judaists 
a mile, will be compelled to go twain. They will not 
find themselves at liberty to pick and choose amongst 
the legal requirements. Their legalist teachers will 
not raise a finger to lighten the yoke (Luke xi. 46), 
when it is once fastened on their necks ; nor will their 
own consciences acquit them of its responsibilities. 
This obligation Paul, himself a master in Jewish law, 
solemnly affirms: ‘I protest (I declare before God) to 
every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to 
perform the whole law.” 

Now this is a proved impossibility. Whoever “sets 
up the law,” he had avouched to Cephas, “ makes him- 
self a transgressor ” (ch. ii. 18). Nay, it was established 
of set purpose to “ multiply transgressions,” to deepen 
and sharpen the consciousness of sin (ch. iii. 19 ; Rom. 
iii, 20; iv. 15; v. 20). Jewish believers in Christ, 
placed under its power by their birth, had thankfully 
found in the faith of Christ a refuge from its accusations 
(ch. ii. 16 ; Rom. vii. 24—viii. 4). Surely the Galatians, 
knowing all this, will not be so foolish as to put them- 
selves gratuitously under its power. To do this would 
be an insult to Christ, and an act of moral suicide. 
This further warning reinforces the first, and is 
uttered with equal solemnity. ‘I tell you, Christ will 
profit you nothing; and again I testify, the law 
will lay its full weight upon you.” They will be left, 
without the help of Christ, to bear this tremendous 
burden. 

This double threatening is blended into one in ver. 4. 


308 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





The pregnant force of Paul’s Greek is untranslatable. 
Literally his words run, “ You were nullified from Christ 
(catnpy7O@nte ato Xpictod)—brought to nought (being 
severed) from Him, you that in law are seeking justifi- 
cation.” He puts his assertion in the past (aoris?) 
tense, stating that which ensues so soon as the principle 
of legal justification is endorsed. From that moment 
the Galatians cease to be Christians. In this sense 
they “are abolished,” just as ‘‘the cross is” virtually 
“abolished” if the Apostle “ preaches circumcision ” 
(ver. 11), and “death is being abolished” under the 
reign of Christ (1 Cor. xv. 26). He has said in ver. 2 
that Christ will be made of none effect to them; now 
he adds that they “ are made of none effect” in relation 
to Christ. Their Christian standing is destroyed. The 
joyous experiences of their conversion, their share in 
Abraham's blessing, their Divine sonship witnessed to 
by the Holy Spirit—all this is nullified, cancelled at a 
stroke, if they are circumcised. The detachment of 
their faith “from Christ” is involved in the process of 
attaching it to Jewish ordinances, and brings spiritual 
destruction upon them. The root of the Christian life 
is faith in Him. Let that root be severed, let the 
branch no longer “abide in the vine”—it is dead 
already.* 

Cut off from Christ, they “have fallen from grace.” 
Paul has already twice identified Christ and grace, in 
ch. i.. 6 and ii, 21. The Divine mercies centre in 
Jesus Christ ; and he who separates himself from Him, 
shuts these out of his soul. The verb here used by 
the Apostle (é&e7écate) is commonly applied (four 
times e.g. in Acts xxvii.) to a ship driven out of her 








* Comp. John xv. 5, 6, where in €8\76n, éénpavOy, there is a like 
summary aorist. 


v.2-6.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 309 


course. Some such image seems to be in the writer’s 
mind in this passage. These racers made an excellent 
start, but they have stumbled (ver. 7; ch. iii. 3); the 
vessel set out from harbour in gallant style, but she is 
drifting fast upon the rocks. This sentence “is the 
exact opposite of ‘stand in the grace,’ Rom. v. 2” 
(Beet).* 

That he who “seeks justification in /aw has fallen 
from grace,” needs no proof after the powerful demon- 
stration of ch. ii; 14—21. The moralist claims quit- 
tance on the ground of his deservings. He pleads 
the quality of his “works,” his punctual discharge of 
every stipulated duty, from circumcision onwards. “I 
fast twice a week,” he tells his Divine Judge; “I tithe 
all my gains. I have kept all the commandments from 
my youth up.” What can God expect more than this ? 
But with these performances Grace has nothing to do. 
The man is not in its order. If he invokes its aid, it is 
as a make-weight, a supplement to the possible short- 
comings in a virtue for the most part competent for 
itself. Now the grace of God is not to be set aside in 
this way ; it refuses to be treated as a mere succeda- 
neum of human virtue. Grace, like Christ, insists on 
being “all in all.” “If salvation is by grace, it is no 
longer of works;” and “if of works, it is no more 
grace” (Rom. xi. 6). These two methods of justifica- 
tion imply different moral tempers, an opposite set and 
direction of the current of life. This question of cir- 
cumcision brings the Galatians to the parting of the 
ways. Grace or Law—which of the two roads will they 
follow ? Both they cannot. They may become Jewish 
proselytes; but they will cease to be Christians. 


* Comp. 2 Pet. ili. 17; for the figure suggested, Eph. iv. 14; 
1 Tim. i. 19. 


310 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


Leaving behind them the light and joy of the heavenly 
Zion, they will find themselves wandering in the 
gloomy desolations of Sinai. 

II. From this prospect the Apostle bids his readers 
turn to that which he himself beholds, and which they 
erewhile shared with him. Again he seems to say, 
“ Be ye as I am, brethren” (ch. iv. 12); not in outward 
condition alone, but still more in inward experience 
and aspiration. ‘For we by the Spirit, on the ground 
of faith, are awaiting the hope of righteousness” (ver. 5). 

Look on this picture, and on that. Yonder are the 
Galatians, all in tumult about the legalistic proposals, 
debating which of the Hebrew feasts they shall cele- 
brate and with what rites, absorbed in the details of 
Mosaic ceremony, all but persuaded to be circumcised 
and to settle their scruples out of hand by a blind sub- 
mission to the Law. And here, on the other side, is 
Paul with the Church of the Spirit, walking in the 
righteousness of faith and the communion of the Holy 
Spirit, joyfully awaiting the Saviour’s final coming and 
the hope that is laid up in heaven. How vexed, how 
burdened, how narrow and puerile is the one condition 
of life; how large and lofty and secure the other. 
“We,” says the Apostle ‘‘are looking forwards not 
backwards, to Christ and not to Moses.” 

Every word in this sentence is full of meaning. 
Faith carries an emphasis similar to that it has in 
ch. ii. 16; iii. 22; and in Rom. iv. 16. Paul supports 
by contrast what he has just said: “ Your share in the 
kingdom of grace is lost who seek a legal righteousness 
(ver. 4); it is dy faith that we look for our heritage.” 
Hope is clearly matter of hope, the future glory of the 
redeemed, described in Rom. viii. 18—25, Phil. iii. 20, 
21, in both of which places there appears the remark- 


v.2-6.} SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 311 


ably compounded verb (dz-ex-SeyouePa) that concludes 
this verse. It implies an intent expectancy, sure of its 
object and satisfied with it. The hope is ‘‘righteous- 
ness’ hope ””—the hope of the righteous—for it has in 
righteousness its warrant. The saying of Psalm xvi., 
verified in Christ’s rising from the dead, contains its 
principle: ‘Thou wilt not leave my soul to death; nor 
suffer Thine holy one to see the pit.” This was the 
secret “hope of Israel,” * that grew up in the hearts of 
the men of faith, whose accomplishment is the crowning 
glory of the redemption of Christ. It is the goal of 
faith. Righteousness is the path that leads to it. The 
Galatians had been persuaded of this hope and embraced 
it; if they accept the “ other gospel,’ with its phantom 
of a legal righteousness, their hope will perish. 

The Apostle is always true to the order of thought 
here indicated. Faith saves from first to last. The 
present righteousness and future glory of the sons of 
God alike have their source in faith. The act of reli- 
ance by which the initial justification of the sinner was 
attained, now becomes the habit of the soul, the channel 
by which its life is fed, rooting itself ever more deeply 
into Christ and absorbing more completely the virtue of 
His death and heavenly life. Faith has its great 
ventures ; it has also its seasons of endurance, its 
moods of quiet expectancy, its unweariable patience. 
It can wait as well as work. It rests upon the past, 
seeing in Christ crucified its ‘author ;” then it looks 
on to the future, and claims Christ glorified for its 
“finisher.” So faith prompts her sister Hope and 
points her to “the glory that shall be revealed.” If 
faith fails, hope quickly dies. Unbelief is the mother 





* Acts xxiii. 6; xxiv. 15 ; xxvi. 6—8; comp. John vi. 39, 40, 44. 


312 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





of despair. “Of faith,” the Apostle says, “we look 
out |” 

A second condition, inseparable from the first, marks 
the hope proper to the Christian righteousness. It is 
sustained “by the Spirit.” The connection of faith 
and hope respectively with the gift of the Holy Spirit 
is marked very clearly by Paul in Eph. i. 13, 14: 
“ Having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit, 
who is the earnest of our inheritance." The Holy Spirit 
seals the sons of God—“ sons, then heirs” (ch. iv. 6, 7; 
Rom. viii. 15—17). This stamps on Christian hope a 
spiritual character. The conception which we form of 
it, the means by which it is pursued, the temper and 
attitude in which it is expected, are determined by the 
Holy Spirit who inspires it. This pure and celestial 
hope is therefore utterly removed from the selfish 
ambitions and the sensuous methods that distinguished 
the Judaistic movement (ch. iv. 3, 9; vi. 12—14). 
“Men of worldly, low design” like Paul’s opponents 
in Galatia, had no right to entertain “the hope of 
righteousness.” These matters are spiritually dis- 
cerned ; they are ‘‘the things of the Spirit, the things 
which God hath prepared for them that love Him” (1 
Cor. ii. 9—14). 

If faith and hope are in sight, /ove cannot be far off. 
In the next verse it comes to claim its place beside the 
other two: “faith working through love.” And so the 
blessed trio is complete, Fides, amor, spes: summa 
Christianismi (Bengel). Faith waits, but it also works ;* 


* “* Working through love,” not wrought (R.V. margin). The latter 
rendering of the participle is found in some of the Fathers, and is pre- 
ferred by Romanist interpreters in the interest of their doctrine of fides 
formata. Paul’s theology and his verbal usage alike require the middle 
sense of this verb, adopted by modern commentators with one con- 


v.2-6.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 313 





and love is its working energy. Love gives faith 
hands and feet ; hope lends it wings. Love is the fire 
at its heart, the life-blood coursing in its veins; hope 
the light that gleams and dances in its eyes. Looking 
back to the Christ that hath been manifested, faith 
kindles into a boundless love; looking onward to the 
Christ that shall be revealed, it rises into an exultant 
hope. 

These closing words are of no little theological 
importance. ‘‘ They bridge over the gulf which seems 
to separate the language of Paul and James. Both 
assert a principle of practical energy, as opposed to a 
barren, inactive theory” (Lightfoot). Had the faith of 
Paul’s readers been more practical, had they been of 
a diligent, enterprising spirit, ‘ready for every good 
word and work,” they would not have felt, to the same 
degree, the spell of the Judaistic fascination. Idle hands, 
vain and restless minds, court temptation. A manly, 
energetic faith will never play at ritualism or turn 
religion into a round of ceremonial, an zesthetic exhibi- 
tion. Loving and self-devoting faith in Christ is the one 
thing Paul covets to see in the Galatians. This is the 
working power of the gospel, the force that will lift and 
regenerate mankind. In comparison with this, ques- 
tions of Church-order and forms of worship are 
“nothing.” ‘The body is more than the raiment.” 
Church organization is a means toa certain end; and 
that end consists in the life of faith and love in 
Christian souls. Each man is worth to Christ and to 


sent. The middle voice implies that through love faith gets zto action, 
ts operative, efficacious, shows what it cando. Comp., for Pauline usage, 
Rom. vii. 5; 2 Cor. i. 6. iv. 12 ; Eph. iii. 20; Col. i. 29; 1 Thess. ii. 
13; 2 Thess. ii. 7; and see Moulton’s Winers “. 7. Grammar, 
p- 318 (mote on dynamic middle). 


314 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 











His Church just so much as he possesses of this energy 
of the Spirit, just so much as he has of love to Christ 
and to men in Him. Other gifts and qualities, offices 
and orders of ministry, are but instruments for love to 
employ, machinery for love to energize. 

The Apostle wishes it to be understood that he does 
not condemn circumcision on its own account, as though 
the opposite condition were in itself superior. If “ cir- 
cumcision does not avail anything, metther does uncir- 
cumcision.” The Jew is no better or worse a Christian 
because he is circumcised ; the Gentile no worse or better, 
because he is not. This difference in no way affects the 
man’s spiritual standing or efficiency. Let the Galatians 
dismiss the whole question from their minds. ‘“ One 
thing is needful,” to be filled with the Spirit of love. 
“God’s kingdom is not meat and drink;” it is not 
“days and seasons and years ;” it is not circumcision, 
nor rubrics and vestments and priestly functions ; it is 
‘righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit.” 
These are the true sofes of the Church; “by love,” 
said Christ, ‘‘all men will know that you are My 
disciples.” 

In these two sentences (vv. 5 and 6) the religion 
of Christ is summed up. Ver. 5 gives us its statics; 
ver. 6 its dynamics. It is a condition, and an occupa- 
tion; a grand outlook, and an intent pursuit; a Divine 
hope for the future, and a sovereign power for the 
present, with an infinite spring of energy in the love of 
Christ. The active and passive elements of the Christian 
life need to be justly balanced. Many of the errors of 
the Church have arisen from one-sidedness in this 
respect. Some do nothing but sit with folded hands 
till the Lord comes; others are too busy to think of 
His coming at all. So waiting degenerates into in- 


v.2-6.] SHALL THE GALATIANS BE CIRCUMCISED? 315 
dolence ; and serving into feverish hurry and anxiety, 
or mechanical routine. Let hope give calmness and 
dignity, buoyancy and brightness to our work ; let work 
make our hope sober, reasonable, practical. 


“These three abide—faith, hope, and love.” They 
cannot change while God is God and man is man. 
Forms of dogma and of worship have changed and 
must change. There is a perpetual “removing of the 
things that are shaken, as of things that are made;” 
but through all revolutions there “remain the things 
which are not shaken.” To these let us rally. On 
these let us build. New questions thrust themselves 
to the front, touching matters as little essential to the 
Church’s life as that of circumcision in the Apostolic 
age. The evil is that we make so much of them. In 
the din of controversy we grow bewildered; our eyes 
are blinded with its dust; our souls chafed with its 
fretting. We lose the sense of proportion; we fail to 
see who are our true friends, and who our foes. We 
need to return to the simplicity that isin Christ. Let 
us ‘‘consider Him”—Christ incarnate, dying, risen, 
reigning—till we are changed into the same image, till 
His life has wrought itself into ours. Then these 
questions of dispute will fall into their proper place. 
They will resolve themselves; or wait patiently for 
their solution. Loyalty to Jesus Christ is the only 
solvent of our controversies. 

Will the Galatians be true to Christ ? Or will they 
renounce their righteousness in Him for a legal status, 
morally worthless, and which will end in taking from 
them the hope of eternal life? They have nothing to 
gain, they have everything to lose in submitting to’ 
circumcision. 


CHAPTER XXI. 
THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 


** Ye were running well ; who did hinder you that ye should not obey 
the truth? This persuasion came not of him that calleth you. A little 
leaven leaveneth the whole lump. I have confidence to you-ward, in 
the Lord, that ye will be none otherwise minded : but he that troubleth 
you shall bear his judgement, whosoever he be. But I, brethren, if I 
still preach circumcision, why am I still persecuted? then hath the 
stumblingblock of the cross been done away. I would that they 
which unsettle you would even mutilate themselves.” —GAL. v. 7—12. 


HE Apostle’s controversy with the Legalists is 
all but concluded. He has pronounced on the 
question of circumcision. He has shown his readers, 
with an emphasis and clearness that leave nothing 
more to be said, how fearful is the cost at which they 
will accept the ‘‘other gospel,” and how heavy the 
yoke which it will impose upon them. A few further 
observations remain to be made—of regret, of re- 
monstrance, blended with expressions of confidence 
more distinct than any the Apostle has hitherto 
employed. Then with a last contemptuous thrust, a 
sort of coup de grace for the Circumcisionists, Paul 
passes to the practical and ethical part of his letter, 
This section is made up of short, disconnected 
sentences, shot off in various directions ; as though the 
writer wished to have done with the Judaistic debate, 
and would discharge at a single volley the arrows 


v.7-12.] THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 317 


remaining in his quiver. Its prevailing tone is that of 
conciliation towards the Galatians (comp. Chapter xvu11.), 
with increasing severity towards the legalist teachers. 
“See how bitter he is against the deceivers. For 
indeed at the beginning he directed his censures against 
the deceived, calling them ‘senseless’ both once and 
again. But now that he has sufficiently chastened and 
corrected them, for the rest he turns against their 
deceivers. And we should observe his wisdom in both 
these things, in that he admonishes the one party and 
brings them to a better mind, being his own children 
and capable of amendment; but the deceivers, who 
are a foreign element and incurably diseased, he cuts 
off” (Chrysostom). 

There lie before us therefore in this paragraph the 
following considerations :—Paul’s hope concerning the 
Galatian Churches, his protest on his own behalf, and 
finally, hes judgement respecting the troublers. 

I. The more hopeful strain of the letter at this point 
appears to be due to the effect of his argument upon 
the writers own mind. As the breadth and grandeur 
of the Christian faith open out before him, and he 
contrasts its spiritual glory with the ignoble aims of 
the Circumcisionists, Paul cannot think that the readers 
will any longer doubt which is the true gospel. Surely 
they will be disenchanted. His irrefragable reasonings, 
his pleading entreaties and solemn warnings are bound 
to call forth a response from a people so intelligent and 
so affectionate. ‘For my part,” he says, ‘“Z am confi- 
dent in the Lord that you will be no otherwise minded 
(ver. 10), that you will be faithful to your Divine calling, 
despite the hindrances thrown in your way.” They 
will, he is persuaded, come to see the proposals of the 
Judaizers in their proper light. They will think about 


318 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


the Christian life—its objects and principles—as he 
himself does ; and will perceive how fatal would be the 
step they are urged to take. They will be true to 
themselves and to the Spirit of sonship they have 
received. They will pursue more earnestly the hope 
set before them and give themselves with renewed 
energy to the work of faith and love (vv. 5, 6), and 
forget as soon as possible this distracting and unprofit- 
able controversy. 

“In the Lord” Paul cherishes this confidence. “In 
Christ’s grace” the Galatians were called to enter the 
kingdom of God (ver. 8; ch. i. 6) ; and He was concerned 
that the work begun in them should be completed 
(Phil. i. 6). It may be the Apostle at this moment 
was conscious of some assurance from his Master that 
his testimony in this Epistle would not prove in vain. 
The recent * submission of the Corinthians would tend 
to increase Paul’s confidence in his authority over the 
Gentile Churches. 

Another remembrance quickens the feeling of hope 
with which the Apostle draws the conflict to a close. 
He reminds himself of the good confession the Galatians 
had aforetime witnessed,f the zeal with which they 
pursued the Christian course, until this deplorable 
hindrance arose: ‘‘ You were running well—/nely, 
You had fixed your eyes on the heavenly prize. Filled 
with an ardent faith, you were zealously pursuing the 
great spiritual ends of the Christian life (comp. vv. 5, 6). 
Your progress has been arrested. You have yielded 
to influences which are not of God who called you, 
and admitted amongst you a leaven that, if not cast 


* See Chapter I, pp. 15, 16, on the dave of the Epistle. 
fT Comp. ch. iii. 4: “ye suffred so many things,” 


v.7-12.] THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 319 


out, will corrupt you utterly (vv. 8, 9). But I trust 
that this result will be averted. You will return to 
better thoughts. You will resume the interrupted race, 
and by God’s mercy will be enabled to bring it to a 
glorious issue ” (ver. 10). 

There is kindness and true wisdom in this encourage- 
ment. The Apostle has “told them the truth ;” he has 
“‘reproved with all authority ;” now that this is done, 
their remains nothing in his heart but good-will and 
good wishes for his Galatian children. If his chiding 
has wrought the effect it was intended to produce, then 
these words of softened admonition will be grateful 
and healing. They have ‘stumbled, but not that they 
might fall.” The Apostle holds out the hand of restora- 
tion; his confidence animates them to hope better 
things for themselves. He turns his anger away from 
them, and directs it altogether upon their injurers. 

I]. The Judaizers had troubled the Churches of 
Galatia; they had also maligned the Apostle Paul. 
From them undoubtedly the imputation proceeded 
which he repudiates so warmly in ver. 11: “ And I, 
brethren, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am 
I still persecuted?” This supposition a moment's 
reflection would suffice to refute. The contradiction 
was manifest. The persecution which everywhere 
followed the Apostle marked him out in all men’s eyes 
as the adversary of Legalism. 

_ There were circumstances, however, that lent a 
certain colour to this calumny. The circumcision of 
Timothy, for instance, might be thought to look in this 
direction (Acts xvi. I—3). And Paul valued his 
Hebrew birth. He loved his Jewish brethren more 
than his own salvation (Rom. ix. I—5; xi. 1). There 
was nothing of the revolutionary or the inconoclast 


320 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





about him. Personally he preferred to conform to the 
ancient usages, when doing so did not compromise the 
honour of Christ (Acts xviii. 18; xxi. 17—26). It was 
false that he “taught the Jews not to circumcise their 
children, nor to walk by the customs” (Acts xxi. 20—26). 
He did teach them that these things were ‘of no avail 
in Christ Jesus ;” that they were in no sense necessary 
to salvation ; and that it was contrary to the will of 
Christ to impose them upon Gentiles. But it was 
no part of his business to alter the social customs of 
his people, or to bid them renounce the glories of their 
past. While he insists that ‘there is no difference” 
between Jew and Gentile in their need of the gospel 
and their rights in it, he still claims for the Jew the 
first place in the order of its manifestation. 

This was an entirely different thing from “ preaching 
circumcision” in the legalist sense, from heralding 
(xnptos@ : ver. I1) and crying up the Jewish ordinance, 
and making it a religious duty. This difference the 
Circumcisionists affected not to understand. Some of 
Paul’s critics will not understand it even now. They 
argue that the Apostle’s hostility to Judaism in this 
Epistle discredits the narrative of the Acts of the 
Apostles, inasmuch as the latter relates several instances 
of Jewish conformity on his part. What pragmatical 
narrowness is this! Paul’s adversaries said, “‘He 
derides Judaism amongst you Gentiles, who know 
nothing of his antecedents, or of his practice in other 
places. But when he pleases, this liberal Paul will be 
as zealous for circumcision as any of us. Indeed he 
boasts of his skill in ‘ becoming all things to all men;’ 
he trims his sail to every breeze. In Galatia he is all 
breadth and tolerance; he talks about our ‘liberty 
which we have in Christ Jesus ;’ he is ready to ‘ become 


v.7-12.] THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 321 


as you are ;’ no one would imagine he had ever been 
a Jew. In Judea he makes a point of being strictly 
orthodox, and is indignant if any one questions his 
devotion to the Law.” 

Paul’s position was a delicate one, and open to mis- 
representation. Men of party insist on this or that 
external custom as the badge of their own side; 
they have their party-colours and their uniform. Men 
of principle adopt or lay aside such usages with a 
freedom which scandalizes the partisan. What right, 
he says, has any one to wear our colours, to pronounce 
our shibboleth, if he is not one of ourselves? If the 
man will not be with us, let him be against us. Had 
Paul renounced his circumcision and declared himself 
a Gentile out and out, the Judaists might have under- 
stood him. Had he said, Cireumcision ts evil, they could 
have endured it better ; but to preach that Circumcision 
ts nothing, to reduce this all-important rite to insignifi- 
cance, vexed them beyond measure. It was in their 
eyes plain proof of dishonesty. They tell the Galatians 
that Paul is playing a double part, that his resistance 
to their circumcision is interested and insincere. 

The charge is identical with that of “ man-pleasing ” 
which the Apostle repelled in ch. i. 10 (see Chapter III). 
The emphatic “still” of that passage recurs twice in 
this, bearing the same meaning as it does there. Its 
force is not ¢emporal, as though the Apostle were 
thinking of a former time when he did “ preach circum- 
cision:” no such reference appears in the context, and 
these terms are inappropriate to his pre-Christian career. 
The particle points a /ogical contrast, as e.g. in Rom. 
iii, 7; ix. 19: “If I still (notwithstanding my pro- 
fessions as a Gentile apostle) preach circumcision, why 
am I still (notwithstanding my so preaching) perse- 

é 21 


322 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


cuted ?” Had Paul been known by the Jews to be 
in other places a promoter of circumcision, they would 
have treated him very differently. He could not then 
have been, as the Galatians knew him everywhere to 
be, ‘‘in perils from his fellow-countrymen.” 

The rancour of the Legalists was sufficient proof of 
Paul’s sincerity. They were themselves guilty of the 
baseness with which they taxed him. It was in order 
to escape the reproach of the cross (ver. II), to atone 
for their belief in the Nazarene, that they persuaded 
Gentile Christians to be circumcised (ch. vi. II, 12). 
They were the man-pleasers. The Judaizers knew 
perfectly well that the Apostle’s observance of Jewish 
usage was no endorsement of their principles. The 
print of the Jewish scourge upon his back attested his 
loyalty to Gentile Christendom (ch. vi. 17; 2 Cor. xi. 
24). A further consequence would have ensued from 
the duplicity imputed to Paul, which he resents even 
more warmly: “ Then,” he says, “if 1 preach cireum- 
cision, the offence of the cross is done away!” He is 
charged with treason against the cross of Christ. He 
has betrayed the one thing in which he glories (ch. vi. 14), 
to which the service of his life was consecrated! For 
the doctrine of the cross was at an end if the legal 
ritual were re-established and men were taught to trust 
in the saving efficacy of circumcision—above all, if the 
Apostle of the Gentiles had preached this doctrine ! 
The Legalists imputed to him the very last thing of 
which he was capable. This was in fact the error into 
which Peter had weakly fallen at Antioch. The Jewish 
Apostle had then acted as though “ Christ died in vain” 
(ch. ii, 21). For himself Paul indignantly denies that 
his conduct bore any such construction. 

But he says, ‘‘the scandal of the cross ”—that scan- 


v.7-12.) THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 323 





dalous, offensive cross, the stumbling-block of Jewish 
pride (1 Cor. i. 23). The death of Christ was not only 
revolting in its form to Jewish sentiment ;* it was a 
fatal event for Judaism itself. It imported the end of 
the Mosaic economy. The Church at Jerusalem had 
not yet fully grasped this fact; they sought, as far as 
possible, to live on good terms with their non-Christian 
Jewish brethren, and admitted perhaps too easily into 
their fellowship men who cared more for Judaism than 
for Christ and His cross. For them also the final 
rupture was approaching, when they had to “go forth 
unto Jesus without the camp.” Paul had seen from 
ine first that the breach was irreparable. He deter- 
mined to keep his Gentile Churches free from Judaic 
entanglements, In his view, Calvary was the terminus 
of Mosaism. 

This was true fistorically. The crime of national 
Judaism in slaying its Messiah was capital. Its spiritual 
blindness and its moral failure had received the most 
signal proof. The congregation of Israel had become 
a synagogue of Satan. And these were “the chosen 
people,” the world’s eé/ite, who “crucified the Lord of 
glory!” Mankind had done this thing. The world 
has “‘ both seen and hated both Him and the Father.” 
Now to set up circumcision again, or any kind of 
human effort or performance, as a ground of justifica- 
tion before God, is to ignore this judgement; it is to 
make void the sentence which the cross of Christ has 
passed upon all ‘‘works of righteousness which we 
have done.” ‘This teaching sorely offends moralists 
and ceremonialists, of whatever age or school; it is 
“the offence of the cross.” 


* Comp. Chapter XII, pp. 193—4. 


324 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





And further, as matter of Divine appointment the 
sacrifice of Calvary put an end to Jewish ordinances. 
Their significance was gone. The Epistle to the 
Hebrews developes this consequence at length in other 
directions. For himself the Apostle views it from a 
single and very definite standpoint. The Law, he says, 
had brought on men a curse; it stimulated sin to its 
worst developments (ch. iii. 10, 19). Christ's death 
under this curse has expiated and removed it for us 
(ch. iii. 13). His atonement met man’s guilt in its 
culmination. The Law had not prevented—nay, it gave 
occasion to the crime; it necessitated, but could not 
provide expiation, which was supplied ‘outside the 
law” (Rom. iii. 21: yopts vouov). The “ offence” of 
the doctrine of the cross lay just here. It reconciled 
man with God on an extra-legal footing. It provided 
a new ground of justification and pronounced the old 
worthless. It fixed the mark of moral impotence and 
rejection upon the system to which the Jewish nature 
clung with passionate pride. To preach the cross was 
to declare legalism abolished: to preach circumcision 
was to declare the cross and its offence abolished. 

This dilemma the Circumcisionists would fain escape. 
They fought shy of Calvary. Like some later moralists, 
they did not see why the cross should be always 
pushed to the front, and its offence forced upon the world, 
Surely there was in the wide range of Christian truth 
abundance of other profitable topics to discuss, without 
wounding Jewish susceptibilities in this way. But 
this endeavour of theirs is just what Paul is determined 
to frustrate. He confronts Judaism at every turn with 
that dreadful cross. He insists that it shall be realised 
in its horror and its shame, that men shall feel the 
tremendous shock which it gives to the moral conceit, 





v.7-12.] ZHE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 325 


the self-justifying spirit of human nature, which in the 
Jew of this period had reached its extreme point. “If 
law could save, if the world were not guilty before God,” 
he reiterates, “why that death of the cross? God 
hath set Him forth @ propitiation.” And whoso accepts 
Jesus Christ must accept Him crucified, with all the 
offence and humiliation that the fact involves. 

In later days the death of Christ has been made void 
in other ways. It is veiled in the steam of our incense. 
It is invested with the halo of a sensuous glorification. 
The cross has been for many turned into an artistic 
symbol, a beautiful idol, festooned with garlands, 
draped in poetry, but robbed of its spiritual meaning, 
its power to humble and to save. Let men seeit ‘‘ openly 
set forth,” in its naked terror and majesty, that they 
may know what they are and what their sins have done. 

We rely on birth and good breeding, on art and 
education as instruments of moral progress. Improved 
social arrangements, a higher environment, these, we 
think, will elevate the race. Within their limits these 
forces are invaluable; they are ordained of God. But 
they are only /aw at the best. When they have done 
their utmost, they leave man still unsaved—proud, 
selfish, unclean, miserable. To rest human salvation 
on self-improvement and social reform, is legalism over 
again. To civilise is not to regenerate. These 
methods were tried in Mosaism, under circumstances 
in many respects highly favourable. ‘The scandal 
of the cross” was the result, Education and social 
discipline may produce a Pharisee, nothing higher. 
Legislation and environment work from the outside. 
They cannot touch the essential human heart. Nothing 
has ever done this like the cross of Jesus Christ. He 
who “makes it of none effect,” whether in the name 


“Tas Tite 
hoes Stes 


326 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


of Jewish tradition or of modern progress, takes away 
the one practicable hope of the moral regeneration of 
mankind. 

III. We are now in a position to estimate more 
precisely the character and motives of the Judaistic 
party, the hinderers and troublers of this Epistle. 

In the first place, it appears that they had entered 
the Galatian communities from without. The fact that 
they are called troublers (disturbers) of itself suggests 
this (ver. 10; ch. i. 7). They came with a professed 
“gospel,” as messengers bringing new tidings; the 
Apostle compares them to himself, the first Galatian 
evangelist, “or an angel from heaven” (ch. i. 8, 9). 
He glances at them in his reference to “ false brethren” 
at an earlier time “ brought into (the Gentile Church) 
unawares” (ch. ii. 4). These men are “courting” the 
favour of Paul’s Galatian disciples, endeavouring to 
gain them over in his absence (ch, iv. 17, 18). They 
have made misleading statements respecting his early 
career and relations to the Church, which he is at 
pains to correct. They professed to represent the 
views of the Pillars at Jerusalem; and quoted their 
authority against the Apostle Paul. 

From these considerations we infer that “the 
troublers” were Judaistic emissartes from Palestine. 
The second Epistle to Corinth, contemporaneous with 
this letter, reveals the existence of a similar propaganda 
in the Greek capital at the same period. Paul had 
given the Galatians warning on the subject at his last 
visit (ch. i. 9). There were already, we should suppose, 
in the Galatian societies, before the arrival of the 
Judaizers, Jewish believers in Christ of legalistic 
tendencies, prepared to welcome and support the new 
teachers, But it was the coming of these agitators from 












v.7-12.] THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 327 





without that threw the Churches of Galatia into such 
a ferment, and brought about the situation disclosed in 
this Epistle. 

The allusion made in chap. ii. 12 to “certain from 
James,”* taken in connection with other circumstances, 
points, as we think, to the outbreak of a systematic 
agitation against the Apostle Paul, which was carried 
on during his third missionary tour, and drew from 
him the great evangelical Epistles of this epoch. This 
anti-Pauline movement emanated from Jerusalem and 
pretended to official sanction. Set on foot at the time 
of the collision with Peter at Antioch, the conflict is 
now in full progress. The Apostle’s denunciation of 
his opponents is unsparing. They “hinder” the 
Galatians ‘from obeying truth” (ver. 7); they entice 
them from the path in which they had bravely set out, 
and are robbing them of their heritage in Christ. It 
was a false, a perverted gospel that they taught (ch. i. 
7). They cast on their hearers an envious spell which 
drew them away from the cross and its salvation (ch. 
ii. 21; iii. 1). Not truth, but self-interest and party- 
ends were .the objects they pursued (ch. iv. 17; vi. 
12, 13). Their “ persuasion” was assuredly not of 
God, “who had called” the Galatians through the 
Apostle’s voice. If God had sent Paul amongst them, 
as the Galatians had good reason to know, clearly He 
had not sent these men, with their “ other gospel.” 

The vitiating “leaven” at work in the spiritual life of 
the Galatians, if not arrested, would soon “ leaven the 
whole lump.” The Apostle applies to the Judaistic 
doctrine the same figure under which he described the 





* Compare Chapter IX, pp.131—4. We refer this occurrence to the 
interval between the second and third of Paul’s missionary journeys 
(Acts xvili. 22), A.D. 54. 


328 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





taint of immorality found in the Church of Corinth 
(1 Cor. v. 6—8). So zealous and unscrupulous, so 
deadly in its effect on evangelical faith and life was the 
spirit of Jewish legalism. The Apostle trusts that his 
Galatians will after all escape from this fatal infection, 
that they will leave “the troublers ” alone to “ bear the 
judgement” which must fall upon them (ver. 10). The 
Lord is the Keeper, and the Avenger of His Church. 
No one, “ whosoever he be,” will injure it with impunity. 
Let the man that makes mischief in the Church of 
Jesus Christ take care what he is about. The tempted 
may escape; sins of ignorance and weakness can be 
forgiven. But woe unto the tempter! 

Against the wilful perverters of the gospel the 
Apostle at the outset delivered his anathema. For 
these Circumcisionists in particular he has one further 
wish to express. It is a grim sort of suggestion, to 
be read rather by way of sarcasm than in the strict 
letter of fulfilment. The devotees of circumcision, he 
means to say, might as well go a step farther. If the 
physical mark of Judaism, the mere surgical act, is so 
salutary, why not “cut off” the member altogether, 
like the emasculated priests of Cybelé? (ver. 12).* This 
mutilation belonged to the worship of the great heathen 
goddess of Asia Minor, and was associated with her 
debasing cultus. Moreover it excluded its victim from 
a place in the congregation of Israel (Deut. xxiii. 1). 


* The rendering of the R.V. margin is that of all the Greek inter- 
preters, and of Meyer, Lightfoot, Beet, and the strict grammatical 
commentators amongst the moderns. ‘The form and usage of the verb 
do not allow of any other. Apart from its unseemliness, the expression 
is powerfully appropriate. This condemnation of the Old-Testament 
sacrament is not more severe than the language of Isa. Ixvi. 3: “* Ile 
that slaughtereth an ox is a man-slayer, he that bringeth a meal-offering 
—it is swine’s blood.” 


v.7-12.| THE HINDERERS AND TROUBLERS. 329 


This mockery, though not to be judged by modern 
sentiment, in any case went to the verge of what 
charity and decency permit. It breathes a burning 
contempt for the Judaizing policy. It shows how 
utterly circumcision had lost its sacredness for the 
Apostle. Its spiritual import being gone, it was now 
a mere “concision” (Phil. ili. 2), a cutting of the 
body—nothing more. 

Such language was well calculated to disgust Gentile 
Christians with the rite of circumcision. It helps to 
account for the implacable hatred with which Paul was 
regarded by orthodox Jews. It accords with what 
he intimated in ch. iv. 9, to the effect that Jewish 
conformity was for the Gentiles in effect heathenish. 
Apart from its relation to the obsolete Mosaic covenant, 
circumcision was in itself no holier than the deformities 
inflicted by Paganism on its votaries. 

The Judaizers are finally described, not merely as 
“troublers” and ‘“hinderers,” but as “those that 
unsettle you”—or more strongly still, “ overthrow you.” 
The Greek word (avactatéw) occurs in Acts xvii. 6, 
xxi. 38, where it is rendered, turn upside down, stir to 
sedition. These men were carrying on a treasonable 
agitation. False themselves to the gospel of Christ, 
they incited the Galatians to belie their Christian 
professions, to betray the cause of Gentile liberty, and 
to desert their own Apostle. They deserved to suffer 
some degrading punishment. “Full” as they were 
“of subtlety and mischief, perverting the right ways 
of the Lord,” Paul did well to denounce them and 
to turn their zeal for circumcision to derisive scorn, 





LHE ETHICAL APPLICATION. 


CHAPTER v. 13—vi. IO. 





CHAPTER XXII 
THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 


“ For ye, brethren, were called for freedom ; only use not your freedom 
fcr an occasion to the flesh, but through love be servants one to another. 
For the whole law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love 
thy neighbour as thyself. But if ye bite and devour one another, take 
heed that ye be not consumed one of another.”—GAL. v. 13—I5. 


UR analysis has drawn a strong line across the 

middle of this chapter. At ver. 13 the Apostle 
turns his mind in the ethical direction. He has dis- 
missed “ the troublers” with contempt in ver. 12; and 
until the close of the Epistle does not mention them 
again; he addresses his readers on topics in which they 
are left out of view. But this third, ethical section of 
the letter is still continuous with its polemical and 
doctrinal argument. 

It applies the maxim of ver. 6, “ Faith works through 
love” ; it reminds the Galatians how they had ‘re- 
ceived the Spirit of God” (ch. iii. 2, 3; iv. 6). The 
rancours and jealousies opposed to love, the carnal 
mind that resists the Spirit—these are the objects of 
Paul’s dehortations. The moral disorders which the 
Apostle seeks to correct arose largely out of the mischief 
caused by the Judaizers. And his exhortations to love 
and good works are themselves indirectly polemical. 
They vindicate Paul’s gospel from the charge of anti- 
nomianism, while they guard Christians from giving 


334 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





occasion to the charge. They protect from exaggera- 
tion and abuse the liberty already defended from 
legalistic encroachments. The~more precious and 
sacred is the freedom of Gentile believers, the more 
on the one hand do those deserve punishment who 
would defraud them of it; and the more earnestly 
must they on their part guard this treasure from mis- 
use and dishonour. In this sense ver. 13a stands be- 
tween the sentence against the Circumcisionists in ver. 
12 and the appeal to the Galatians that follows. It 
repeats the proclamation of freedom made in ver. I, 
making it the ground at once of the judgement pro- 
nounced against the foes of freedom and the admoni- 
tion addressed to its possessors. ‘‘ For you were called 
(summoned by God to enter the kingdom of His Son) 
with a view to liberty—not to legal bondage; nor, on 
the other hand, that you might run into licence and 
give the reins to self-will and appetite—not /iberty for 
an occasion to the flesh.” 

I. Here lies the danger of liberty, especially when 
conferred on a young, untrained nature, and in a newly 
emancipated community. 

Freedom is a priceless boon; but it is a grave re- 
sponsibility. It has its temptations, as well as its joys 
and dignities. The Apostle has spoken at length of 
the latter: it is the former that he has now to urge. 
Keep your liberties, he seems to say; for Christ's sake 
and for truth’s sake hold them fast, guard them well. 
You are God’s regenerated sons. Never forego your 
high calling. God is on your side; and those who 
assail you shall feel the weight of His displeasure. 
Yes, “stand fast” in the liberty wherewith “ Christ 
made you free.” But take care how you employ your 
freedom ; “ only use not liberty for an occasion to the 


v.13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 335 


flesh.” This significant oly turns the other side of 
the medal, and bids us read the legend on its reverse 
front. On the obverse we have found it written, ‘ The 
Lord knoweth them that are His” (2 Tim. ii. 19; comp. 
Gal. iv. 6, 9). This is the side of privilege and of 
grace, the spiritual side of the Christian life. On the 
reverse it bears the motto, ‘“Let every one that nameth 
the name of the Lord depart from iniquity.” This is 
the second, the ethical side of our calling, the side of 
duty, to which we have now to turn. 

The man, or the nation that has won its freedom, has 
won but half the battle. It has conquered external 
foes; it has still to prevail over itself. And this is the 
harder task. Men clamour for liberty, when they mean 
licence ; what they seek is the liberty of the flesh, not 
of the Spirit, freedom to indulge their lusts and to 
trample on the rights of others, the freedom of outlaws 
and brigands. The natural man defines freedom as the 
power to do as he likes; not the right of self-regula- 
tion, but the absence of regulation is what he desires. 
And this is just what the Spirit of God will never 
allow (ver. 17). When such a man has thrown off 
outward constraint and the dread of punishment, there 
is no inward law to take its place. It is his greed, his 
passion, his pride and ambition that call for freedom ; 
not his conscience. And to all such libertarians our 
Saviour says, “ He that committeth sin is the slave of 
sin.” No tyrant is so vile, so insatiable as our own 
self-indulged sin. A pitiable triumph, for-a man to 
have secured his religious liberty only to become the 
thrall of his vices ! 

It is possible that some men accepted the gospel 
under the delusion that it afforded a shelter for sin. 
The sensualist, deterred from his indulgences by fear 


336 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





of the Law, joined in Paul’s campaign against it, imagin- 
ing that Grace would give him larger freedom. If 
“where sin abounded grace did superabound,” he 
would say in his heart, Why not sin the more, so that 
grace might have a greater victory? This is no fanciful 
inference. Hypocrisy has learned to wear the garb of 
evangelical zeal; and teachers of the gospel have not 
always guarded sufficiently against this shocking per- 
version. Even the man whose heart has been truly 
touched and changed by Divine grace, when the fresh- 
ness of his first love to Christ has passed away and 
temptation renews its assaults, is liable to this decep- 
tion. He may begin to think that sin is less perilous, 
since forgiveness was so easily obtained. He may 
presume that as ason of God, sealed by the Spirit of 
adoption, he will not be allowed to fall, even though he 
stumble. He is one of “God’s elect”; what “ shall 
separate him” from the Divine love in Christ? In this 
assurance he holds a talisman that secures his safety. 
What need to “ watch and pray lest he enter into temp- 
tation,” when the Lord is his keeper? He is God's 
enfranchised son; “all things are lawful” to him; 
“things present” as well as “ things to come” are his 
in Christ. By such reasonings his liberty is turned 
into an occasion to the flesh. And men who before 
they boasted themselves sons of God were restrained 
by the spirit of bondage and fear, have found in this 
assurance the occasion, the “ starting-point” (a@opy) 
for a more shameless course of evil. 

In the view of Legalism, this is the natural outcome 
of Pauline teaching. From the first it has been charged 
with fostering lawlessness. In the Lutheran Reforma- 
tion Rome pointed to the Antinomians, and moralists 
of our own day speak of “ canting Evangelicals,” just 


Vv. 13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 337 


as the Judaists alleged the existence of immoral Paulin- 
ists, whose conduct, they declared, was the proper fruit 
of the preaching of emancipation from the Law. These, 
they would say to the Apostle, are your spiritual chil- 
dren ; they do but carry your doctrine to its legitimate 
issue. This reproach the gospel has always had to 
bear ; there have been those, alas, amongst its pro- 
fessors whose behaviour has given it plausibility. 
Sensualists will ‘(turn the grace of our God into 
lasciviousness ;” swine will trample under their feet 
the pure pearls of the gospel. But they are pure and 
precious none the less. 

This possibility is, however, a reason for the utmost 
watchfulness in those who are stewards in the adminis- 
tration of the gospel. They must be careful, like Paul, 
to make it abundantly clear that they “establish” and 
do not ‘make void law through faith” (Rom. iii. 31). 
There is an evangelical Ethics, as well as an evange- 
lical Dogmatics. The ethics of the Gospel have been 
too little studied and applied. Hence much of the 
confessed failure of evangelical Churches in preserving 
and building up the converts that they win. 

II. Faith in Christ gives in truth a new efficacy to the 
moral law. For it works through love; and love fulfils 
all laws in one (vv. 134, 14). Where faith has this 
operation, liberty is safe; not otherwise. Love's slaves 
are the true freemen. 

The legalist practically takes the same view of human 
nature as the sensualist. He knows nothing of “the 
desire of the Spirit” arrayed against that of the flesh 
(ver. 17), nothing of the mastery over the heart that 
belongs to the love of Christ. In his analysis the soul 
consists of so many desires, each blindly seeking its 
own gratification, which must be drilled into order 


22 


338 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





under external pressure, by an intelligent application 
of law. Modern Utilitarians agree with the ancient 
Judaists in their ethical philosophy. Fear of punish- 
ment, hope of reward, the influence of the social 
environment—these are, as they hold, the factors which 
create character and shape our moral being. ‘ Pain 
and pleasure,” they tell us, “are the masters of human 
life.” Without the faith that man is the child of God, 
formed in His image, we are practically shut up to this 
suicidal theory of morals. Swicidal we say, for it robs 
our spiritual being of everything distinctive in it, of all 
that raises the moral above the natural; it makes duty 
and personality illusions. 

Judaism is a proof that this scheme of life is imprac- 
ticable. For the Pharisaic system which produced such 
deplorable moral results, was an experiment in external 
ethics. It was in fact the application of a highly deve- 
loped and elaborate traditional code of law, enforced by 
the strongest outward sanctions, without personal loyalty 
to the Divine Lawgiver. In the national conscience of 
the Jews this was wanting. Their faith in God, as the 
Epistle of James declares, was a “ dead ” faith, a bundle 
of abstract notions. Loyalty is true law-keeping. And 
loyalty springs from the personal relationship of the 
subject and the law-making power. This nexus Christ- 
ian sonship supplies, in its purest and most exalted 
form. When I see in the Lawgiver my Almighty 
Father, when the law has become incarnate in the 
person of my Saviour, my heart’s King and Lord, it 
wears a changed aspect. ‘‘ His commandments are not 
grievous.” - Duty, required by Him, is honour and 
delight. No abstract law, no “stream of tendency” can 
command the homage or awaken the moral energy that 
is inspired by ‘‘the love of God in Christ Jesus our Lord,” 


v. 13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 339 


Here the Apostle traverses antinomian deductions 
from his doctrine of liberty. In the Epistle to the 
Romans (ch. vi.) he deals at length with the theoretical 
objection to his teaching on this subject. He shows 
there that salvation by faith, rightly understood and 
experienced, renders continuance in sin impossible. 
For faith in Christ is in effect the union of the soul with 
Christ, first in His death, and then consequently in His 
risen life, wherein He lives only “to God.” Nay, 
Christ Himself lives in the believing man (Gal. ii. 20). 
Instead of our sinning “ because we are not under the 
law, but under grace,” this is precisely the reason why 
we need not and must not sin. Faith joins us to the 
risen Christ, whose life we share—so Paul argues—and 
we should not sin any more than He. Here, from the 
practical standpoint, he lays it down that faith works 
by love ; and love casts out sin, for it unites all laws in 
wself. Faith links us to Christ in heaven (Romars) ; 
faith fills us with His love on earth (Galatians). So 
love, marked out in ver. 6 as the energy of faith, now 
serves aS the guard of liberty. Neither legalist nor 
law-breaker understands the meaning of faith in Christ. 

At this point Paul throws in one of his bold para- 
doxes. He has been contending all through the Epistle 
for freedom, bidding his readers scorn the legal yoke, 
breathing into them his own contempt for the pettiness 
of Judaistic ceremonial. But now he turns round 
suddenly and bids them Je slaves: “but let love,” he 
says, “make you bondmen to each other” (ver. 13). 
Instead of breaking bonds, he seeks to create stronger 
bonds, stronger because dearer. Paul preaches no 
gospel of individualism, of egotistic salvation-seeking. 
The self-sacrifice of Christ becomes in turn a principle 
of sacrifice in those who receive it. Paul’s own ideal 


340 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


is, to be ‘conformed to His death” (Phil. iii. 10). There 
is nothing anarchic or self-asserting in his plea for 
freedom. He opposes the law of Pharisaic externalism 
in the interests of the law of Christian love. The yoke 
of Judaism must be broken, its bonds cast aside, in 
order to give free play to ‘‘ the law of the Spirit of life 
in Christ Jesus.” Faith transfers authority from flesh 
to spirit, giving it a surer seat, a more effective, and in 
reality more lawful command over man’s nature. It 
restores the normal equipoise of the soul. Now the 
Divine law is written on “the tablets of the heart”; 
and this makes it far more sovereign. than when en- 
graved on the stone slabs of Sinai. Love and law for 
the believer in Christ are fused into one. In this union 
law loses nothing of its holy severity ; and love nothing 
of its tenderness. United they constitute the Christian 
sense of duty, whose sternest exactions are enforced by 
gratitude and devotion. 

And love is ever conqueror. To it toil and endurance 
that mock the achievement of other powers, are a light 
thing. Needing neither bribe nor threat, love labours, 
waits, braves a thousand dangers, keeps the hands busy, 
the eye keen and watchful, the feet running to and fro 
untired through the longest day. There is no industry, 
no ingenuity like that of love. Love makes the mother 
the slave of the babe at her breast, and wins from the 
friend for his friend service that no compulsion could 
exact, rendered in pure gladness and free-will. Its 
power alone calls forth what is best and strongest in 
us all. Love is mightier than death. In Jesus Christ, 
love has “laid down life for its friends”; the fulness 
of life has encountered and overcome the uttermost of 
death. Love esteems it bondage to be prevented, liberty 
only to be allowed to serve. 


v. 13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 341 


Without love, freedom is an empty boon, It brings 
no ease, no joy of heart. It is objectless and listless. 
Bereft of faith and love, though possessing the most 
perfect independence, the soul drifts along like a ship 
rudderless and masterless, with neither haven nor 
horizon. Wordsworth, in his Ode to Duty, has finely 
expressed the weariness that comes of such liberty, 
unguided by an inward law and a Divine ideal: 


“Me this unchartered freedom tires; 

I feel the weight of chance desires: 

My hopes no more must change their name ; 
I long for a repose that ever is the same.” 


But on the other hand, 


“Serene will be our days and bright, 
And happy will our nature be, 
When love is an unerring light, 
And joy its own security.” 


This “royal law” (Jam. ii. 8) blends with its sove- 
reignty of power the charm of simplicity. “The whole 
law,” says the Apostle, “hath been fulfilled in one 
word—Love” (ver. 14). The Master said, “I came 
not to destroy the law, but to fulfil”’ The key to His 
fulfilment was given in the declaration of the twofold 
command of love to God and to our neighbour. “On 
these two hang all the law and the prophets.” Hence 
the Apostle’s phrase, hath been fulfilled. This unifica- 
tion of the moral code is accomplished. Christ's life 
and death have given to this truth full expression and 
universal currency. Love’s fulfilment of law stands 
before us a positive attainment, an incontestable fact. 
Paul does not speak here, as in Rom. xiii. 9, of the 
comprehending, the ‘summing up” of all laws in one; 
but of the bringing of law to its completion, its realisa- 


a7 


342 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


tion and consummation in the love of Christ. “O how 
I love Thy law,” said the purer spirit of the Old 
Testament. ‘Thy love is my law,” says the true spirit 
of the New. 

It is remarkable that this supreme principle of 
Christian ethics is first enunciated in the most legal 
part of the Old Testament. Leviticus is the Book of 
the Priestly Legislation. It is chiefly occupied with 
ceremonial and civil regulations. Yet in the midst of 
the legal minutize is set this sublime and simple rule, 
than which Jesus Christ could prescribe nothing more 
Divine: Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Levit. 
xix. 18). This sentence is the conclusion of a series 
of directions (vv. 9—18) forbidding unneighbourly con- 
duct, each of them sealed with the- declaration, ‘I 
am Jehovah.” This brief code of brotherly love 
breathes a truly Christian spirit; it is a beautiful ex- 
pression of “the law of kindness” that is on the lips 
and in the heart of the child of God. We find in the 
law-book of Mosaism, side by side with elaborate rules 
of sacrificial ritual and the homeliest details touching 
the life of a rude agricultural people, conceptions of God 
and of duty of surpassing loftiness and purity, such as 
meet us in the religion of no other ancient nation. 

The law, therefore, opposed and cast out in the name 
of faith, is brought in again under the shield of love. 
“Tf ye love Me,” said Jesus, “ keep my commandments.” 
Love reconciles law and faith. Law by itself can but 
prohibit this and that injury to one’s neighbour, when 
they are likely to arise. Love excludes the doing of 
any injury ; it “ worketh no ill to its neighbour, therefore 
love is the fulfilling of the law” (Rom. xiii. 10). That 
which law restrains or condemns after the fact, love 
renders impossible beforehand. It is not content with 


v. 13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 343 





the negative prevention of wrong ; it “ overcomes” and 
displaces “ evil with good.” 

“What law could not do,” with all its multiplied 
enactments and redoubled threats, faith “working by 
love” has accomplished at a stroke. “ The righteous- 
ness of the law is fulfilled in those who walk not after 
the flesh, but after the Spirit” (Rom. viii. 3, 4). Gen- 
tile Christians have been raised to the level of a 
righteousness “exceeding that of scribes and phari- 
sees” (Matt. v. 20). The flesh which defied law’s 
terrors and evaded its control, is subdued by the love 
of Christ. Law created the need of salvation; it 
defined its conditions and the direction which it must 
take. But there its powerceased. It could not change 
the sinful heart. It supplied no motive adequate to 
secure obedience. The moralist errs in substituting 
duty for love, works for faith. He would make the 
tule furnish the motive, the path supply strength to 
walk in it. The distinction of the gospel is that it is 
“the power of God unto salvation,” while the law is 
“ weak through the flesh.” 

Paul does not therefore override the law in the 
interest of faith. Quite the contrary, he establishes, 
he magnifies it. His theology rests on the idea of 
Righteousness, which is strictly a legal conception. 
But he puts the law in its proper place. He secures 
for it the alliance of love. The legalist, desiring to 
to exalt law, in reality stultifies it. Striving to make 
it omnipotent, he makes it impotent. In the Apostle’s 
teaching, law is the rule, faith the spring of action. 
Law marks the path, love gives the will and power to 
follow it. Who then are the truest friends of law— 
Legalists or Paulinists, moralists or evangelicals ? 

III. Alas, the Galatians at the present moment afford 


344 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
a spectacle far different from the ideal which Paul has 
drawn. Instead of “ serving each other in love,” they 
are “ biting and devouring one another.” The Church 
is in danger of being “ consumed” by their jealousies 
and quarrels (ver. 15). 

These Asiatic Gauls were men of a warm tempera- 
ment, quick to resent wrong and prone to imagine it. 
The dissensions excited by the Judaic controversy had 
excited their combative temper to an unusual degree. 
“Biting” describes the wounding and exasperating 
effect of the manner in which their contentions were 
carried on; “devour” warns them of its destructive- 
ness. Taunts were hurled across the field of debate ; 
vituperation supplied the lack of argument. Differences 
of opinion engendered private feuds and rankling inju- 
ries. In Corinth the spirit of discord had taken a fac- 
tious form. It arrayed men in conflicting parties, with 
their distinctive watchwords and badges and sectional 
platforms. In these Churches it bore fruit in personal 
affronts and quarrels, in an angry, vindictive temper, 
which spread through the Galatian societies and broke 
out in every possible form of contention (v. 20). If 
this state of things continued, the Churches of Galatia 
would cease to exist. Their liberty would end in 
complete disintegration. 

Like some other communities, the Galatian Christ- 
ians were oscillating between despotism and anarchy ; 
they had not attained the equilibrium of a sober, ordered 
liberty, the freedom of a manly self-control. They had 
not sufficient respect either for their own or for each 
other's rights. Some men must be bridled or they will 
“‘bite;” they must wear the yoke or they run wild, 
They are incapable of being a law unto themselves. 
They have not faith enough to make them steadfast, 


v. 13-15.] THE PERILS OF LIBERTY. 345 





nor love enough to be an inward guide, nor the Spirit 
of God in measure sufficient to overcome the vanity 
and self-indulgence of the flesh. But the Apostle still 
hopes to see his Galatian disciples worthy of their 
calling as sons of God. -He points out to them the 
narrow but sure path that leads between the desert 
of legalism on the one hand, and the gulf of anarchy 
and licence on the other. 


The problem of the nature and conditions of Christian 
liberty occupies the Apostle’s mind in different ways 
in all the letters of this period. The young Churches 
of the Gentiles were in the gravest peril. They had 
come out of Egypt to enter the Promised Land, the 
heritage of the sons of God. The Judaists sought to 
turn them aside into the Sinaitic wilderness of Mosaism ; 
while their old habits and associations powerfully tended 
to draw them back into heathen immorality. Legalism 
and licence were the Scylla and Charybdis on either 
hand, between which it needed the most firm and 
skilful pilotage to steer the bark of the Church. The 
helm of the vessel is in Paul’s hands. And, through 
the grace of God, he did not fail in his task. It is in 
the love of Christ that the Apostle found his guiding 
light. ‘‘ Love,” he has written, “ never faileth.” 

Love is the handmaid of faith, and the firstborn fruit 
of the Spirit of Christ (vv. 6, 22). Blending with the 
law, love refashions it, changing it into its own image. 
Thus moulded and transfigured, law is no longer an 
exterior yoke, a system of restraint and penalty; it 
becomes an inner, sweet constraint. Upon the child 
of God it acts as an organic and formative energy, the 
principle of his regenerated being, which charges with 
its renovating influence all the springs of life. Evil 


346 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, — 











A —<— $$ i# 
is met no longer by a merely outward opposition, but 4 
by a repugnance proceeding from within. “ The Spirit — 
lusteth against the flesh” (v. 17). The law of the — 
Spirit of life in Christ Jesus becomes the law of the 
man’s new nature. God known and loved in Christ — 
is the central object of his life. Within the Divine — 
kingdom so created, the realm of love and of the Spirit, 
the soul henceforth dwells ; and under that kingdom it 
places for itself all other souls, loved like itself in 
Christ, 


CHAPTER. XXIII. 
CHRIST S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 


[He showeth the battell of the flesh and the Spirit; and the fruits of 
them both. Weading in Genevan Bible. | 


** But I say, Walk by the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the 
flesh. For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against 
the flesh ; for these are contrary the one to the other ; that ye may not 
do the things that ye would. But if ye are led by the Spirit, ye are 
not under the law. . . . And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified 
the flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof. If we live by the 
Spirit, by the Spirit let us also walk. Let us not be vainglorious, 
provoking one another, envying one another.”—GAL., v. 16—26. 


OVE is the guard of Christian freedom. The Holy 

Spirit is its guide. These principles accomplish 

what the law could never do. It withheld liberty, and 

yet did not give purity. The Spirit of love and of 

sonship bestows both, establishing a happy, ordered 
freedom, the liberty of the sons of God. 

From the first of these two factors of Christian ethics 
the Apostle passes in ver. 16 to the second. He con- 
ducts us from the consequence to the cause, from the 
human aspect of spiritual freedom to the Divine. Love, 
he has said, fulfils all laws in one. It casts out evil 
from the heart ; it stays the injurious hand and tongue ; 
and makes it impossible for liberty to give the rein to 
any wanton or selfish impulse. But the law of love is 
no natural, automatic impulse. It is a Divine inspira- 





348 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


tion. “Love is of God.” It is the characteristic “ fruit 
of the Spirit” of adoption (ver. 22), implanted and 
nourished from above. When I bid you “by love 
serve each other,” the Apostle says, I do not expect 
you to keep this law of yourselves, by force of native 
goodness : I know how contrary it is to your Galatic 
nature ; “ but I say, walk in the Spirit,” and this will 
be an easy yoke; to “ fulfil the desire of the flesh” 
will then be for you a thing impossible. 

The word Spirit (zvetpate) is written indefinitely ; 
but the Galatians knew well what Spirit the Apostle 
meant. It is “the Spirit” of whom he has spoken so 
often in this letter, the Holy Spirit of God, who had 
entered their hearts when they first believed in Christ 
and taught them to call God Father. He gave them 
their freedom : He will teach them how to use it. The 
absence of the definite article in Pneuma does not 
destroy its personal force, but allows it at the same 
time a broad, qualitative import, corresponding to that 
of the opposed “desire of the flesh.” The walk 
governed ‘‘ by the Spirit” is a spiritual walk. As for 
the interpretation of the dative case (rendered variously 
by, or in, or even for the Spirit), that is determined by 
the meaning of the noun itself. “ The Spirit” is not 
the path “in” which one walks; rather He supplies 
the motive principle, the directing influence of the new 
life.* Ver. 16 is interpreted by vv. 18 and 25. To 
“walk in the Spirit” is to be “led by the Spirit”; it 
is so to “live in the Spirit” that one habitually 
“moves” (marches : ver. 25) under His direction. 

This conception of the indwelling Spirit of God as 
the actuating power of the Christian’s moral life pre- 








* The construction of ch. vi. 16; Rom. iv. 12; Phil. iii. 16, is not 
strictly analogous. 


v.16-26.] CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 349 








dominates in the rest of this chapter. We shall pursue 
the general line of the Apostle’s teaching on the subject 
in the present Chapter, leaving for future exposition the 
detailed enumeration of the “ fruit of the Spirit” and 
“works of the flesh” contained in vv. 19—23. This 
antithesis of Flesh and Spirit presents the following 
considerations :—(1) the diametrical opposition of the two 
Sorces ; (2) the effect of the predominance of one or the 
other ; (3) the mastery over the flesh which belongs to 
those who are Christ's. In a word, Christ’s Spirit is 
the absolute antagonist and the sure vanquisher of our 
sinful human flesh. 

I. “I say, Walk by the Spirit, and you will verily 
not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” On what ground does 
this bold assurance rest ? Because, the Apostle replies, 
the Spirit and the flesh are opposites (ver. 17). Each is 
bent on destroying the ascendency of the other. Their 
cravings and tendencies stand opposed at every point. 
Where the former rules, the latter must succumb. 
“For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit 
against the flesh.” 

The verb /ust in Greek, as in English, bears 
commonly an evil sense; but not necessarily so, nor 
by derivation. It is a sad proof of human corruption 
that in all languages words denoting strong desire tend 
to an impure significance. Paul extends to “the 
desire of the Spirit” the term which has just been used 
of “the lust of the flesh,” in this way sharpening the 
antithesis.* Words appropriated to the vocabulary of 
the flesh and degraded by its use, may be turned some- 
times to good account and employed in the service of 


* Comp. Jas. iv. 5: “The Spirit which He made to dwell in us, 
yearneth even unto jealous envy” (2. V. margin) ; alsu the double use 
of §m\éw in ch. iv. 17, 18 (Chapter XVIII, pp. 279, 280.). 


pda. 5 
vy > 


350 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





the Holy Spirit, whose influence redeems our speech 
and purges the uncleanness of our lips. 

The opposition here affirmed exists on the widest 
scale. All history is a battlefield for the struggle 
between God's Spirit and man’s rebellious flesh. In 
the soul of a half-sanctified Christian, and in Churches 
like those of Corinth and Galatia whose members are 
“yet carnal and walk as men,” the conflict is patent. 


The Spirit of Christ has established His rule in the - 


heart ; but His supremacy is challenged by the insur- 
rection of the carnal powers. The contest thus revived 
in the soul of the Christian is internecine; it is that of 
the kingdoms of light and darkness, of the opposite 
poles of good and evil. It is an incident in the war 
of human sin against the Holy Spirit of God, which 
extends over all time and all human life. Every lust, 
every act or thought of evil is directed, knowingly or 
unknowingly, against the authority of the Holy Spirit, 
against the presence and the rights of God immanent 
in the creature. Nor is there any restraint upon evil, 
any influence counteracting it in man or nation or race, 
which does not proceed from the Spirit of the Lord. 
The spirit of man has never been without a Divine 
Paraclete. ‘God hath not left Himself without 
witness” to any; and “it is the Spirit that beareth 
witness, because the Spirit is truth.” The Spirit of 
truth, the Holy Spirit, is the Spirit of all truth and 
holiness. In the “truth as it is in Jesus” He possesses 
His highest instrument. But from the beginning it 


was His office to be God’s Advocate, to uphold law, to ~ 


convict the conscience, to inspire the hope of mercy, to 
impart moral strength and freedom. We “ believe in 
the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of life.” 

This war of Spirit and Flesh is first ostensibly 


v.16-26.] CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 351 


declared in the words of Gen. vi. 3. This passage 
indicates the moral reaction of God’s Spirit against the 
world’s corruption, and the protest which in the darkest 
periods of human depravity He has maintained. God 
had allowed men to do despite to His good Spirit. But 
it cannot always be so. A time comes when, outraged 
and défied, He withdraws His influence from men and 
from communities; and the Flesh bears them along 
to swift destruction. So it was in the world before 
the Flood. So largely amongst later heathen peoples, 
when God “suffered all nations to walk in their own 
ways.” Even the Mosaic law had proved rather a 
substitute than a medium for the free action of the 
Spirit of God on men. “The law was spiritual,” but 
“weak through the flesh.” It denounced the guilt 
which it was powerless to avert. 

With the advent of Christ all this is changed. The 
Spirit of God is now, for the first time, sent forth in 
His proper character and His full energy. At last His 
victory draws near. He comes as the Spirit of Christ 
and the Father, “poured out upon all flesh.” “A new 
heart will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within 
you. I will put My Spirit within you” (Ezek. xxxvi. 
25—27): this was the great hope of prophecy; and it 
is realised. The Spirit of God’s Son regenerates the 
human heart, subdues the flesh, and establishes the 
communion of God with men. , The reign of the Spirit 
on earth was the immediate purpose of the manifestation 
of Jesus Christ. 

But what does Paul really mean by ‘the flesh?” 
It includes everything that is not ‘of the Spirit.” It 
signifies the entire potency of sin. It is the contra- 
spiritual, the undivine in man. Its “works,” as we 
find in vv. 20, 21, are not bodily vices only, but 


4 


352 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





include every form of moral debasement and aberration. 
Flesh in the Apostle’s vocabulary follows the term 
spirit, and deepens and enlarges its meaning precisely 
as the latter does. Where spirit denotes the super- 
sensible in man, flesh is the sensible, the bodily nature 
as such. When spirit rises into the supernatural and 
superhuman, flesh becomes the natural, the human by 
consequence. When sfirit receives its highest signifi- 
cation, denoting the holy Effluence of God, His personal 
presence in the ‘world, flesh sinks to its lowest and 
represents unrenewed nature, the evil principle oppug- 
nant and alien to God. It is identical with sim. But 
in this profound moral significance the term is more 
than a figure. Under its use the body is marked out, 
not indeed as the cause, but as the instrument, the 
vehicle of sin. Sin has incorporated itself with our 
organic life, and extends its empire over the material 
world. When the Apostle speaks of “ the body of sin” 
and ‘‘of death,” and bids us “ mortify the deeds of the 
body” and ‘the members which are upon the earth,” * 
his expressions are not to be resolved into metaphors. 
On this definition of the terms, it is manifest that 
the antagonism of the Flesh and Spirit is fundamental. 
They can never come to terms with each other, nor 
dwell permanently in the same being. Sin must be 
extirpated, or the Holy Spirit will finally depart. The 
struggle must come to. a definitive issue. Human 
character tends every day to a more determinate form ; 
and an hour comes in each case when the victory of 
flesh or spirit is irrevocably fixed, when “ the filthy” 
will henceforth “be filthy still,” and “the holy, holy 
still” (Rev. xxii. I1). 
1I—13 ; iii. 5. 


v. 16-26.] CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 353 





The last clause of ver. 17, “that ye may not do the 
things that ye would,” has been variously interpreted. 
The rendering of the Authorized Version (‘‘so that ye 
cannot”) is perilously misleading. Is it that the flesh 
prevents the Galatians doing the good they would? Or 
is the Spirit to prevent them doing the evil they other- 
wise would? Or are both these oppositions in existence 
at once, so that they waver between good and evil, 
leading a partly spiritual, partly carnal life, consistent 
neither in right nor wrong? The last is the actual 
state of the case. Paul is perplexed about them (ch. 
iv. 20); they are in doubt about themselves. They 
did not “walk in the Spirit,” they were not true to 
their Christian principles; the flesh was too strong 
for that. Nor would they break away from Christ 
and follow the bent of their lower nature; the Holy 
Spirit held them back from doing this. So they have 
two wills,—or practically none. This state of things 
was designed by God,—“‘ 7” order that ye may not do the 
things ye haply would ;” it accords with the methods 
of His government. Irresolution is the necessary effect 
of the course the Galatians had pursued. So far they 
stopped short of apostasy ; and this restraint witnessed 
to the power of the Holy Spirit still at work in their 
midst (ch. iii. 5; vi. 1). Let this Divine hand cease to 
check them, and the flesh would carry them, with the 
full momentum of their will, to spiritual ruin. Their 
condition is just now one of suspense. They are poised 
in a kind of moral equilibrium, which cannot continue 
long, but in which, while it lasts, the action of the 
conflicting forces of Flesh and Spirit is strikingly 
manifest. 

II. These two principles in their development lead 
to entirely opposite results. 


23 


354 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


(1) The works of the flesh—“ manifest” alas, both 
then and now—exclude from the kingdom of God. “1 
tell you beforehand,” the Apostle writes, ‘‘as I have 
already told you: they who practise such things will 
not inherit God’s kingdom ” (v. 21). 

This warning is essential to Paul’s gospel (Rom. ii. 
16); it is good news for a world where wrong so often 
and so insultingly triumphs, that there is a judgement 
to come. Whatever may be our own lot in the great 
award, we rejoice to believe that there will be a right- 
eous settlement of human affairs, complete and final; 
and that this settlement is in the hands of Jesus Christ. 
In view of His tribunal the Apostle goes about “ warning 
and teaching every man.” And this is his constant 
note, amongst profligate heathen, or hypocritical Jews, 
or backsliding and antinomian Christians,—“ The un- 
righteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” For 
that kingdom is, above all, righteousness. Men of 
fleshly minds, in the nature of things, have no place 
in it. They are blind to its light, dead to its influence, 
at war with its aims and principles. “If we say that 
we have fellowship with Him—the Father of our Lord 
Jesus Christ—and walk in darkness, we He” (1 Johni. 6). 
“Those who do such things” forfeit by doing them 
the character of sons of God. His children seek to 
be “perfect as their heavenly Father is perfect.” They 
are ‘ blameless and harmless, imitators of God, walking 
in love as Christ loved us” (Phil. ii. 15 ; Eph. v. 1, 2). 
The Spirit of God’s Son is a spirit of love and peace, 
of temperance and gentleness (v. 22). If these fruits 
are wanting, the Spirit of Christ is not in us and we 
are none of His. We are without the one thing by 
which He said all men would know His disciples (John 
xiii. 35). When the Galatians “bite and devour one 


v. 16-26.] CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. — 355 





another,” they resemble Ishmael the persecutor (ch. iv. 
29), rather than the gentle Isaac, heir of the Covenant. 

“Tf children, then heirs.” Future destiny turns upon 
present character. The Spirit of God’s Son, with His 
fruit of love and peace, is ‘‘ the earnest of our inherit- 
ance, sealing us against the day of redemption” (Eph. 
i. 14; iv. 30). By selfish tempers and fleshly indul- 
gences He is driven from the soul; and losing Him, it 
is shut out from the kingdom of grace on earth, and 
from the glory of the redeemed. “There shall in no 
wise enter into it anything unclean;” such is the 
excommunication written above the gate of the Heavenly 
City (Rev. xxi. 27). This sentence of the Apocalypse 
puts a final seal upon the teaching of Scripture. The 
God of revelation is the Holy One; His Spirit is the 
Holy Spirit ; His kingdom is the kingdom of the saints, 
whose atmosphere burns like fire against all impurity. 
Concerning the men of the flesh the Apostle can only 
say, ‘‘ Whose end is perdition” (Phil. iii. 19). 

Writing to the Corinthians, Paul entreats his readers 
not to be deceived upon this point (1 Cor. vi. 9, 10; 
Eph. v. 5). It seems so obvious, so necessary a prin- 
ciple, that one wonders how it should be mistaken, 
why he is compelled to reiterate it as he does in this 
place. And yet this has been a common delusion. No 
form of religion has escaped being touched by Anti- 
nomianism. It is the divorce of piety from morality. 
It is the disposition to think that ceremonial works on 
the one hand, or faith on the other, supersede the 
ethical conditions of harmony with God.  Foisting 
itself on evangelical doctrine this error leads men to 
assume that salvation is the mere pardon of sin. The 
sinner appears to imagine he is saved in order to 
remain a sinner. He treats God’s mercy as a kind 


356 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


of bank, on which he may draw as often as his offences 
past or future may require. He does not understand 
that sanctification is the sequel of justification, that 
the evidence of a true pardon lies in a changed heart 
that loathes sin. 

(2) Of the opposite principle the Apostle states not 
the ultimate, but the more immediate consequences. 
“Led by the Spirit, ye are not under the law” (ver. 
18); and “ Against such things—love, peace, goodness, 
and the like—there is no law” (ver. 23). 

The declaration of ver. 18 is made with a certain 
abruptness. Paul has just said, in ver. 17, that the 
Spirit is the appointed antagonist of the flesh. And 
now he adds, that if we yield ourselves to His in- 
fluence we shall be no longer under the law. This 
identification of sin and the law was established in 
ch. ii. 16—18; iii. 10—22. The law by itself, the 
Apostle showed, does not overcome sin, but aggra- 
vates it; it shuts men up the hopeless prisoners of 
their own past mis-doing. To be “under law” is to 
be in the position of Ishmael, the slave-born and finally 
outcast son, whose nature and temper are of the flesh 
(ch. iv. 21—31). After all this we can understand his 
writing /aw for sim in this passage, just as in I Cor. xv. 
56 he calls “the law the power of sin.” To be under 
law was, in Paul’s view, to be held consciously in the 
grasp of sin. This was the condition to which Legalism 
would reduce the Galatians. From this calamity the 
Spirit of Christ would keep them free. 

The phrase “under law” reminds us once more of 
the imperilled liberty of the Galatians. Their spiritual 
freedom and their moral safety were assailed in 
common. In ver. 16 he had said, ‘‘Let the Holy 
Spirit guide you, and you will vanquish sin”; and 


v.16-26.] CHRIST°*S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 357 


now, “By the same guidance you will escape the 
oppressive yoke of the law.” Freedom from sin, 
freedom from the Jewish law—these two liberties 
were virtually one. ‘Sin shall not lord it over you, 
because ye are not under law, but under grace” (Rom. 
vi. 14). Ver. 23 explains this double freedom. Those 
who possess the Spirit of Christ bear His moral fruits. 
Their life fulfils the demands of the law, without being 
due to its compulsion. Law can say nothing against 
them. It did not produce this fruit; but it is bound 
to approve it. It has no hold on the men of the Spirit, 
no charge to bring against them. Its requirements 
are satisfied; its constraints and threatenings are laid 
aside. 

Law therefore, in its Judaistic sense and application, 
has been abolished since “ faith has come.” No 
longer does it rule the soul by fear and compulsion. 
This office, necessary once for the infant heirs of the 
Covenant, it has no right to exercise over spiritual 
men. Law cannot give life (ch. iii, 21). This is 
the prerogative of the Spirit of God. Law says, 
“Thou shalt love the Lord thy God ;” but it never 
inspired such love in any man’s breast. If he does so 
love, the law approves him, without claiming credit to 
itself for the fact. If he does not love his God, law 
condemns him and brands him a transgressor. But 
“the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the 
Holy Ghost.” The teaching of this paragraph on the 
relation of the believer in Christ to God’s law is 
summed up in the words of Rom. viii. 2: “ The law 
of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus made me free from 
the law of sin and death.” Law has become my friend, 
instead of my enemy and accuser. For God’s Spirit 
fills my soul with the love in which its fulfilment is 





358 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
contained. And now eternal life is the goal that 
stands in my view, in place of the death with the 
prospect of which, as a man of the flesh, the law 
appalled me. 

III. We see then that deliverance from sin belongs 
not to the subjects of the law, but fo the freemen of 
the Spirit. This deliverance, promised in ver. 16, is 
declared in ver. 24 as an accomplished fact. “ Walk 
by the Spirit, and ye shali not fulfil the lust of the 
flesh. . . . They that are of Christ Jesus have crucified 
the flesh with its passions and its lusts.” The tyranny 
of the flesh is ended for those who are “in Christ 
Jesus.” His cross has slain their sins. The entrance 
of His Spirit imports the death of all carnal affec 
tions. F 

“They who are Christ's did crucify the flesh.” 
This is the moral application of Paul’s mystical doc- 
trine, central to all his theology, of the believer’s union 
with the Redeemer (see Chapter X, pp. 156—160). 
“Christ in me—I in Him:” there is Paul's secret. 
He was “one spirit” with Jesus Christ—dying, risen, 
ascended, reigning, returning in glory. His old self, 
his old world was dead and gone—slain by Christ's 
cross, buried in His grave (ch. ii. 20; vi. 14). And 
the flesh, common to the evil world and the evil self— 
that above all was crucified. The death of shame and 
legal penalty, the curse of God had overtaken it in the 
death of Jesus Christ. Christ has risen, the “Lord of 
the Spirit” (2 Cor. iii. 18), who “could not be holden” 
by the death which fell on “the body of His flesh.” 
They who are Christ’s rose with Him; while “the 
flesh of sin” stays in His grave. Faith sees it there, 
and leaves it there. We “reckon ourselves dead unto 
sin, and living unto God, in Christ Jesus.” For such 


y.16-26.] CHRIST'S SPIRIT AND HUMAN FLESH. 359 





men, the flesh that was once—imperious, importunate, 
law-defying—is no more. It has received its death- 
stroke. ‘‘God, sending His own Son in the likeness 
of sinful flesh and a sacrifice for sin, condemned sin 
in the flesh” (Rom. viii. 3). Sin is smitten with the 
lightning of His anger. Dooin has taken hold of it. 
Destroyed already in principle, it only waits for men to 
know this and to understand what has been done, till 
it shall perish everywhere. The destruction of the 
sinful flesh—more strictly of “sin in the flesh”— 
occurred, as Paul understood the matter, virtually and 
potentially in the moment of Christ’s death. It was 
our human flesh that was crucified in Him—slain on 
the cross because, though in Him not personally 
sinful, yet in us with whom He had made Himself 
one, it was steeped in sin. Our sinful flesh hung upon 
His cross; it has risen, cleansed and sanctified, from 
His grave. 

What was then accomplished in principle when 
“One died for all,” is realised in point of fact when 
we are ‘baptized into His death ”—when, that is to 
say, faith makes His death ours and its virtue passes 
into the soul. The scene of the cross is inwardly 
rehearsed. The wounds which pierced the Redeemer’s 
flesh and spirit now pierce our consciences. It is a 
veritable crucifixion through which the soul enters into 
communion with its risen Saviour, and learns to live 
His life. Nor is its sanctification complete till it is 
“conformed unto His death” (Phil. iii. 10). So with 
all his train of “passions and of lusts,” the ‘old man” is 
fastened and nailed down upon the new, interior Calvary, 
set up in each penitent and believing heart. The 
flesh may still, as in these Galatians, give mournful 
evidence of life. But it has no right to exist a single 


360 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS. 


hour. De jure it is dead—dead in the reckoning of 
faith. It may die a lingering, protracted death, and 
make convulsive struggles ; but die it must in all who 
are of Christ Jesus. 


Let the Galatians consider what their calling of God 
signified. Let them recall the prospects which opened 
before them in the days of their first faith in Christ, 
the love that glowed in their hearts, the energy with 
which the Holy Spirit wrought upon their nature. Let 
them know how truly they were called to liberty, and 
in good earnest were made sons of God. They have 
only to continue as heretofore to be led by the Spirit of 
Christ and to march forward along the path on which 
they had entered, and neither Jewish law nor their 
own lawless flesh will be able to bring them into 
bondage. ‘‘ Where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is 
liberty.” Where He is not, there is legalism, or 
licence ; or, it may be, both at once. 








CHAPTER XXIV. 
THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 


“Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these, fornication, 
uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, sorcery, enmities, strife, jealousies, 
wraths, factions, divisions, parties, envyings, drunkenness, revellings, 
and such like: of the which I forewarn you, even as I did forewarn 
you, that they which practise such things shall not inherit the kingdom 
of God.” —GAL. v. 19—2I. 


HE tree is known by its fruits: the flesh by its 
“works.” And these works are “manifest.” The 
field of the world—“ this present evil world” (ch. i. 4) 
—exhibits them in rank abundance. Perhaps at no 
time was the civilised world so depraved and godless 
as in the first century of the Christian era, when Tiberius, 
Caligula, Nero, Domitian, wore the imperial purple and 
posed as masters of the earth. It was the cruelty and 
vileness of the times which culminated in these deified 
monsters. By no accident was mankind cursed at this 
epoch with such a race of rulers. The world that wor- 
shipped them was worthy of them. Vice appeared in 
its most revolting and abandoned forms. Wickedness 
was rampant and triumphant. The age of the early 
Roman Empire has left a foul mark in human history 
and literature. Let Tacitus and Juvenal speak for it. 
Paul’s enumeration of the current vices in this pas- 
sage has however a character of its own. It differs 


362 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








from the descriptions drawn by the same hand in other 
Epistles ; and this difference is due doubtless to the 
character of his readers. Their temperament was 
sanguine ; their disposition frank and impulsive. Sins 
of lying and injustice, conspicuous in other lists, are 
not found in this. From these vices the Galatic nature 
was comparatively free. Sensual sins and sins of 
passion—unchastity, vindictiveness, intemperance—occupy 
the field. To these must be added zdolairy, common to 
the Pagan world. Gentile idolatry was allied with the 
practice of impurity on’ the one side ; and on the other, 
through the evil of “sorcery,” with “enmities” and 
“jealousies. So that these works of the flesh belong 
to four distinct types of depravity ; three of which come 
under the head of immorality, while the fourth is the 
universal principle of Pagan irreligion, being in turn 
both cause and effect of the moral debasement connected 
with it. 

I. ‘The works of the flesh are these—/fornication, 
uncleanness, lasciviousness.” A dark beginning! Sins 
of impurity find a place in every picture of Gentile 
morals given by the Apostle. In whatever direction he 
writes—to Romans or Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, 
or Thessalonians—it is always necessary to warn 
against these evils. They are equally “ manifest” in 
heathen literature. The extent to which they stain the 
pages of the Greek and Roman classics sets a heavy 
discount against their value as instruments of Christian 
education. Civilised society in Paul’s day was steeped 
in sexual corruption. 

Fornication was practically universal. Few were 
found, even among severe moralists, to condemn it. 
The overthrow of the splendid classical civilisation, due 
to the extinction of manly virtues in the dominant race, 


ve 19-21.] THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 363 





may be traced largely to this cause. Brave men are 
the sons of pure women. John in the Apocalypse has 
written on the brow of Rome, “the great city which 
reigneth over the kings of the earth,” this legend : “ Baby- 
lon the great, mother of harlots” (Rev. xvii. 5). Whatever 
symbolic meaning the saying has, in its literal sense 
it was terribly true. Our modern Babylons, unless 
they purge themselves, may earn the same title and 
the same doom. 

In writing to Corinth, the metropolis of Greek licen- 
tiousness, Paul deals very solemnly and explicitly with 
this vice. He teaches that this sin, above others, is 
committed ‘against the man’s own body.” It is a 
prostitution of the physical nature which Jesus Christ 
wore and still wears, which He claims for the temple 
of His Spirit, and will raise from the dead to share 
His immortality. Impurity degrades the body, and it 
affronts in an especial degree ‘‘ the Holy Spirit which 
we have from God.” Therefore it stands first amongst 
these “works of the flesh” in which it shows itself 
hostile and repugnant to the Spirit of our Divine son- 
ship. ‘‘Joined to the harlot” in “one body,” the vile 
offender gives himself over in compact and communion 
to the dominion of the flesh, as truly as he who is 
“joined to the Lord” is “ one spirit with Him” 
(1 Cor. vi. 13—20). 

On this subject it is difficult to speak faithfully and 
yet directly. ‘There are many happily in our sheltered 
Christian homes who scarcely know of the existence of 
this heathenish vice, except as it is named in Scripture. 
To them it is an evil of the past, a nameless thing of 
darkness. And it is well it should be so. Knowledge 
‘of its horrors may be suitable for seasoned social re- 
formers, and necessary to the publicist who must under- 


364 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





stand the worst as well as the best of the world he has 
to serve; but common decency forbids its being put 
within the reach of boys and innocent maidens. News- 
papers and novels which reek of the divorce-court and 
trade in the garbage of human life, in “‘ things of which 
it isa shame even to speak,” are no more fit for ordinary 
consumption than the air of the pest-house is for 
breathing. They are sheer poison to the young ima- 
gination, which should be fed on whatsoever things 
are honourable and pure and lovely. But bodily self- 
respect must be learned in good time. Modesty of 
feeling and chastity of speech must adorn our youth. 
“Let marriage be honourable in the eyes of all,” let 
the old chivalrous sentiments of reverence and gentle- 
ness towards women be renewed in our sons, and our 
country’s future is safe. Perhaps in our revolt from 
Mariolatry we Protestants have too much forgotten the 
honour paid by Jesus to the Virgin Mother, and the 
sacredness which His birth has conferred on mother- 
hood. “ Blessed,” said the heavenly voice, “ art thou 
among women.” All our sisters are blessed and 
dignified in her, the holy ‘mother of our Lord” 
(Luke i. 42, 43).* 

Wherever, and in whatever form, the offence exists 
which violates this relationship, Paul’s fiery interdict 
is ready to be launched upon it. The anger of Jesus 
burned against this sin. In the wanton look He dis- 
cerns the crime of adultery, which in the Mosaic law 
was punished with death by stoning. ‘The Lord is 
an avenger in all these things”—in everything that 
touches the honour of the human person and the sanc- 





* Comp., 1 Tim. ii. 13—15: saved through the childbearing—te., 
surely, the bearing of the Child Jesus, ‘he seed of the woman, 


v. 19-21.] THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 365 





tity of wedded life (1 Thess. iv. 1—8). The interests 
that abet whoredom should find in the Church of Jesus 
Christ an organization pledged to relentless war against 
them. The man known to practise this wickedness is 
an enemy of Christ and of his race. He should be 
shunned as we would shun a notorious liar—or a fallen 
woman. Paul’s rule is explicit, and binding on all 
Christians, concerning “the fornicator, the drunkard, 
the extortioner—with such a one no, not to eat” 
(1 Cor. v. g—11). That Church little deserves the 
name of a Church of Christ, which has not means of 
discipline sufficient to fence its communion from the 
polluting presence of “ such a one.” 

Uncleanness and /asciviousness are companions of the 
more specific impurity. The former is the general 
quality of this class of evils, and includes whatever is 
contaminating in word or look, in gesture or in dress, 
in thought or sentiment. ‘ Lasciviousness” is unclean- 
ness open and shameless. The filthy jest, the ogling 
glance, the debauched and sensual face, these tell their 
own tale; they speak of a soul that has rolled in cor- 
ruption till respect for virtue has died out of it. In 
this direction ‘‘the works of the flesh” can go no 
further. A lascivious human creature is loathsomeness 
itself. To see it is like looking through a door into 
hell. 

A leading critic of our own times has, under this 
word of Paul's, put his finger upon the plague-spot in 
the national life of our Gallic neighbours— Ase/geza, or 
Wantonness. There may be a certain truth in this 
charge. Their disposition in several respects resembles 
that of Paul’s Galatians. But we can scarcely afford to 
reproach others on this score. English society is none 
too clean. Home is for our people everywhere, thank 


366 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 


God, the nursery of innocence. But outside its shelter, 
and beyond the reach of the mother’s voice, how many 
perils await the weak and unwary. In the night-streets 
of the city the ‘‘strange woman” spreads her net, 
“‘whose feet go down to death.” In workshops and 
business-offices too often coarse and vile language goes 
on unchecked, and one unchaste mind will infect a 
whole circle. Schools, wanting in moral discipline, may 
become seminaries of impurity. There are crowded 
quarters in large towns, and wretched tenements in 
many a country village, where the conditions of life are 
such that decency is impossible; and a soil is prepared 
in which sexual sin grows rankly. To cleanse these 
channels of social life is indeed a task of Hercules ; but 
the Church of Christ is loudly called to it. Her voca- 
tion is in itself a purity crusade, a war declared against 
“all filthiness of flesh and spirit.” 

IJ. Next to /ust in this procession of the Vices comes 
idolatry. In Paganism they were associated by many 
ties. Some of the most renowned and popular cults 
of the day were open purveyors of sensuality and lent 
to it the sanctions of religion. Idolatry is found here 
in fit company (comp. I Cor. x. 6—8). Peter’s First 
Epistle, addressed to the Galatian with other Asiatic 
Churches, speaks of “the desire of the Gentiles” as 
consisting in “lasciviousness, lusts, winebibbings, revel- 
lings, carousings, and abominable idolatries” (ch. iv. 3). 

Idolatry forms the centre of the awful picture of Gentile 
depravity drawn by our Apostle in his letter to Rome 
(ch. i.). It is, as he there shows, the outcome of man’s 
native antipathy to the knowledge of God. Willingly 
men “took lies in the place of truth, and served the 
creature rather than the Creator.” They merged God 
in nature, debasing the spiritual conception of the 


v. 19-21.] THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 367 


Deity with fleshly attributes. This blending of God 
with the world gave rise, amongst the mass of man- 
kind, to Polytheism; while in the minds of the more 
reflective it assumed a Pantheistic shape. The manifold 
of nature, absorbing the Divine, broke it up into “‘ gods 
many and lords many ’—gods of the earth and sky and 
ocean, gods and goddesses of war, of tillage, of love, of 
art, of statecraft and handicraft, patrons of human vices 
and follies as well as of excellencies, changing with 
every climate and with the varying moods and condi- 
tions of their worshippers. No longer did it appear 
that God made man in His image; now men made 
gods in “the likeness of the image of corruptible man, 
and of wingéd and four-footed and creeping things.” 

When at last under the Roman Empire the different 
Pagan races blended their customs and faiths, and “the 
Orontes flowed into the Tiber,” there came about a 
perfect chaos of religions. Gods Greek and Roman, 
Phrygian, Syrian, Egyptian jostled each other in the 
great cities—a colluvies deorum more bewildering even 
than the colluvies gentium,—each cultus striving to 
outdo the rest in extravagance and licence. ‘The 
system of classic Paganism was reduced to impotence. 
The false gods destroyed each other. ‘he mixture of 
heathen religions, none of them pure, produced com- 
plete demoralisation. 

The Jewish monotheism remained, the one rock of 
human faith in the midst of this dissolution of the old 
nature-creeds. Its conception of the Godhead was not 
so much metaphysical as ethical. ‘Hear O Israel,” 
says every Jew to his fellows, “the Lord our God is 
one Lord.” But that “one Lord” was also “the Holy 
One of Israel.” Let his holiness be sullied, let the 
thought of the Divine ethical transcendence suffer 


7a 


368 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


eclipse, and He sinks back again into the manifold of 
nature. Till God was manifest in the flesh through 
the sinless Christ, it was impossible to conceive of a 
perfect purity allied to the natural. To the mind of 
the Israelite, God’s holiness was one with the aloneness 
in which he held Himself sublimely aloof from all 
material forms, one with the pure spirituality of His 
being. ‘There is none holy save the Lord ; neither 
is there any rock like our God:” such was his lofty 
creed. On this ground prophecy carried on its inspired 
struggle against the tremendous forces of naturalism. 
When at length the victory of spiritual religion was 
gained in Israel, unbelief assumed another form; the 
knowledge of the Divine unity hardened into a sterile 
and fanatic legalism, into the idolatry of dogma and 
tradition ; and Scribe and Pharisee took the place of 
Prophet and of Psalmist. 

The idolatry and immorality of the Gentile world 
had a common root. God’s anger, the Apostle declared, 
blazed forth equally against both (Rom. i. 18). The 
monstrous forms of uncleanness then prevalent were a 
fitting punishment, an inevitable consequence of heathen 
impiety. They marked: the lowest level to which 
human nature can fall in its apostasy from God. Self- 
respect in man is ultimately based on reverence for the 
Divine. Disowning his Maker, he degrades himself. 
Bent on evil, he must banish from his soul that 
warning, protesting image of the Supreme Holiness in 
which he was created. 


“He tempts his reason to deny 
God whom his passions dare defy.” 


“They did not like to retain God in their knowledge.” 
“They loved darkness rather than light, because their 


v. 19-21.] THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 369 





deeds were evil.” These are terrible accusations. 
But the history of natural religion confirms their truth. 

Sorcery is the attendant of idolatry. A low, natural- 
istic conception of the Divine lends itself to immoral 
purposes. Men try to operate upon it by material 
causes, and to make it a partner in evil. Such is the 
origin of magic. Natural objects deemed to possess 
supernatural attributes, as the stars and the flight of 
birds, have divine omens ascribed to them. Drugs of 
occult power, and things grotesque or curious made 
mysterious by the fancy, are credited with influence 
over the Nature-gods. From the use of drugs in 
incantations and exorcisms the word pharmakeia, here 
denoting sorcery, took its meaning. The science of 
chemistry has destroyed a world of magic connected 
with the virtues of herbs. These superstitions formed 
a chief branch of sorcery and witchcraft, and have 
flourished under many forms of idolatry. And the 
magical arts were common instruments of malice. The 
sorcerer’s charms were in requisition, as in the case of 
Balaam, to curse one’s enemies, to weave some spell 
that should involve them in destruction. Accordingly 
sorcery finds its place there between idolatry and 
enmities. 

III. On this latter head the Apostle enlarges with 
edifying amplitude. LEnmities, strife, jealousies, ragings, 
factions, divisions, parties, envyings—what a list! 
Eight out of fifteen of ‘the works of the flesh manifest ” 
to Paul in writing to Galatia belong to this one 
category. The Celt all over the world is known for a 
hot-tempered fellow. He has high capabilities ; he is 
generous, enthusiastic, and impressionable. Meanness 
and treachery are foreign to his nature. But he is 
writable, And it is in a vain and irritable disposition 

24 


370 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


that these vices are engendered. Strife and division 
have been proverbial in the history of the Gallic 
nations. Their jealous temper has too often neutralised 
their engaging qualities; and their quickness and 
cleverness have for this reason availed them but little 
in competition with more phlegmatic races. In High- 
land clans, in Irish septs, in French wars and Revolu- 
tions the same moral features reappear which are found 
in this delineation of Galatic life. This persistence of 
character in the races of mankind is one of the most 
impressive facts of history. 

“Enmities” are private hatreds or family feuds, 
which break out openly in “ strife.” This is seen in 
Church affairs, when men take opposite sides not so 
much from any decided difference of judgement, as from 
personal dislike and the disposition to thwart an 
opponent. ‘Jealousies” and “wraths” (or “rages”) 
are passions attending enmity and strife. There is 
jea.usy where one’s antagonist is a rival, whose 
success is felt as a wrong to oneself. This may be a 
silent passion, repressed by pride but consuming the 
mind inwardly. age is the open eruption of anger 
which, when powerless to inflict injury, will find vent 
in furious language and menacing gestures. There are 
natures in which these tempests of rage take a perfectly 
demonic form. The face grows livid, the limbs move 
convulsively, the nervous organism is seized by a storm 
of frenzy ; and until it has passed, the man is literally 
beside himself. Such exhibitions are truly appalling. 
They are “works of the flesh” in which, yielding to 
its own ungoverned impulse, it gives itself up to be 
possessed by Satan and is “ set on fire of hell.” 

Factions, divisions, parties are words synonymous. 
“Divisions” is the more neutral term, and represents 


v. 19-21.] THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 371 


the state into which a community is thrown by the 
working of the spirit of strife. “ Factions” imply more 
of self-interest and policy in those concerned ; “ parties” 
are due rather to self-will and opinionativeness. The 
Greek word employed in this last instance, as in I Cor. 
xi. 19, has become our heresies. It does not imply of 
necessity any doctrinal difference as the ground of the 
party distinctions in question. At the same time, this 
expression is an advance on those foregoing, pointing 
to such divisions as have grown, or threaten to grow 
into “ distinct and organized parties” (Lightfoot). 

Envyings (or grudges) complete this bitter series. 
This term might have found a place beside ‘“‘ enmities” 
and “strife.” Standing where it does, it seems to denote 
the rankling anger, the persistent ill-will caused by 
party-feuds. The Galatian quarrels left behind them 
grudges and resentments which became inveterate. 
These “ envyings,” the fruit of old contentions, were 
-n turn the seed of new strife. Settled rancour is the 
last and worst form of contentiousness. It is so much 
more culpable than “jealousy” or “rage,” as it has not 
the excuse of personal conflict ; and it does not subside, 
as the fiercest outburst of passion may, leaving room 
for forgiveness. It nurses its revenge, waiting, like 
Shylock, for the time when it shall “feed fat its ancient 
grudge.” 

“Where jealousy and faction are, there,” says James, 
“is confusion and every vile deed.” This was the 
state of things to which the Galatian societies were 
tending. The Judaizers had sown the seeds of discord, 
and it had fallen on congenial soil. Paul has already 
invoked Christ’s law of love to exorcise this spirit of 
destruction (vv. 13—15). He tells the Galatians that 
their vainglorious and provoking attitude towards each 


other and their envious disposition are entirely con- 
trary to the life in the Spirit which they professed to 
lead (vv. 25, 26), and fatal to the existence of the 
Church. These were the “passions of the flesh” 
which most of all they needed to crucify. 

IV. Finally, we come to sins of intemperance— 
drunkenness, revellings, and the like. 

These are the vices of a barbarous people. Our 
Teutonic and Celtic forefathers were alike prone to 
this kind of excess. Peter warns the Galatians against 
“wine-bibbings, revellings, carousings.” The passion 
for strong drink, along with “Jasciviousness” and 
“Justs ” on the one hand, and “ abominable idolatries” 
on the other, had in Asia Minor swelled into a “cataclysm 
of riot,” overwhelming the Gentile world (1 Pet. iv. 
3, 4). The Greeks were a comparatively sober people. 
The Romans were more notorious for gluttony than 
for hard drinking. The practice of seeking pleasure 
in intoxication is a remnant of savagery, which exists 
to a shameful extent in our own country. It appears 
to have been prevalent with the Galatians, whose 
ancestors a few generations back were northern 
barbarians. 

A strong and raw animal nature is in itself a tempta- 
tion to this vice. For men exposed to cold and hard- 
ship, the intoxicating cup has a potent fascination. The 
flesh, buffeted by the fatigues of a rough day’s work, 
finds a strange zest in its treacherous delights. The 
man “drinks and forgets his poverty, and remembers 
his misery no more.” For the hour, while the spell 
is upon him, he is a king; he lives under another sun; 
the world’s wealth is his. He wakes up to find himself 
a sot! With racked head and unstrung frame he 
returns to the toil and squalor of his life, adding new 


372 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


1.1g-21.]) THE WORKS OF THE FLESH. 373 





wretchedness to that he had striven to forget. Anon 
he says, “I will seek it yet again!” When the craving 
has once mastered him, its indulgence becomes his only 
pleasure. Such men deserve our deepest pity. They 
need for their salvation all the safeguards that Christian 
sympathy and wisdom can throw around them. 

There are others “given to much wine,” for whom 
one feels less compassion. Their convivial indulgences 
are a part of their general habits of luxury and sen- 
suality, an open, flagrant triumph of the flesh over the 
Spirit. These sinners require stern rebuke and warn- 
ing. They must understand that “those who practise 
such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God,” that 
““he who soweth to his own flesh, shall of the flesh 
reap corruption.” Of these and their like it was that 
Jesus said, ‘‘Woe unto you that laugh now; for ye 
shall mourn and weep.” 

Our British Churches at the present time are more 
alive to this than perhaps to any other social evil. 
They are setting themselves sternly against drunken- 
ness, and none too soon. Of all the works of the flesh 
this has been, if not the most potent, certainly the most 
conspicuous in the havoc it has wrought amongst us. 
Its ruinous effects are “‘ manifest” in every prison and 
asylum, and in the private history of innumerable 
families in every station of life. Who is there that 
has not lost a kinsman, a friend, or at least a neighbour 
or acquaintance, whose life was wrecked by this ac- 
cursed passion? Much has been done, and is doing, to 
check its ravages. But more remains to be accom- 
plished before civil law and public opinion shall furnish 
all the protection against this evil necessary for a 
people so tempted by climate and by constitution as 
our own. 


374 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





With fornication at the beginning and drunkenness at 
the end, Paul’s description of ‘‘ the works of the flesh” 
is, alas! far indeed from being out of date. The dread 
procession of the Vices marches on before our eyes. 
Races and temperaments vary ; science has transformed 
the visible aspect of life; but the ruling appetites of 
human nature are unchanged, its primitive vices are with 
us to-day. The complicated problems of modern life, 
the gigantic evils which confront our social reformers, 
are simply the primeval corruptions of mankind in a 
new guise—the old lust and greed and hate. Under 
his veneer of manners, the civilized European, untouched 
by the grace of the Holy Spirit of God, is still apt to 
be found a selfish, cunning, unchaste, revengeful, super- 
stitious creature, distinguished from his barbarian pro- 
genitor chiefly by his better dress and more cultivated 
brain, and his inferior agility. Witness the great 
Napoleon, a very “ god of this world,” but in all that 
gives worth to character no better than a savage! 

With Europe turned into one vast camp and its 
nations groaning audibly under the weight of their 
armaments, with hordes of degraded women infesting 
the streets of its cities, with discontent and social 
hatred smouldering throughout its industrial: popula- 
tions, we have small reason to boast of the triumphs of 
modern civilisation. Better circumstances do not make 
better men. James’ old question has for our day a 
terrible pertinence: ‘‘ Whence come wars and fightings 
among you? Come they not hence, even of your 
pleasures that war in your members? Ye lust, and 
have not: ye kill, and covet, and cannot obtain. Ye 
ask and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may 
spend it on your pleasures.” 











f 
= 


CHAPTER XXV. 


THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 


“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, 
kindness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance : against such there 
is no law.”—GAL. v. 22, 23. 


7" HE tree is known by its fruits.” Such was the 
criterion of religious profession laid down by 
the Founder of Christianity. This test His religion 
applies in the first instance to itself. It proclaims a 
final judgement for all men; it submits itself to the 
present judgement of all men—a judgement resting in 
each case on the same ground, namely that of fruit, 
of moral issue and effects. For character is the true 
summum bonum, it is the thing which in our secret 
hearts and in our better moments we all admire and 
covet. The creed which produces the best and purest 
character, in the greatest abundance and under the most 
varied conditions, is that which the world will believe. 
These verses contain the ideal of character furnished 
by the gospel of Christ. Here is the religion of Jesus 
put in practice. These are the sentiments and habits, 
the views of duty, the temper of mind, which faith in 
Jesus Christ tends to form. Paul’s conception of the 
ideal human life at once “commends itself to every 
man’s conscience.” And he owed it to the gospel of 
Christ. His ethics are the fruit of his dogmatic faith. 
What other system of belief has produced a like result, 


= ie 
rig 


376 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


or has formed in men’s minds ideas of duty so reason- 
able and gracious, so just, so balanced and perfect, and 
above all so practicable, as those inculcated in the 
Apostle’s teaching ? 

“Men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of 
thistles.” Thoughts of this kind, lives of this kind, are 
not the product of imposture or delusion. The “ works” 
of systems of error are “ manifest” in the moral wrecks 
they leave behind them, strewing the track of history. 
But the virtues here enumerated are the fruits which 
the Spirit of Christ has brought forth, and brings forth 
at this day more abundantly than ever. As a theory 
of morals, a representation of what is best in conduct, 
Christian teaching has held for 1800 years an unrivalled 
place. Christ and His Apostles are still the masters 
of morality. Few have been bold enough to offer any 
improvements on the ethics of Jesus; and smaller still 
has been the acceptance which their proposals have 
obtained. The new idea of virtue which Christianity 
has given to the world, the energy it has imparted to 
the moral will, the immense and beneficial revolu- 
tions it has brought about in human society, supply a 
powerful argument for its divinity. Making every 
deduction for unfaithful Christians, who dishonour 
“the worthy name” they bear, still “the fruit of the 
Spirit” gathered in these eighteen centuries is a 
glorious witness to the virtue of the tree of life from 
which it grew. 

This picture of the Christian life takes its place side 
by side with others found in Paul’s Epistles. It recalls 
the figure of Charity in 1 Cor. xiii., acknowledged by 
moralists of every school to be a master-piece of 
characterization. It stands in line also with the -oft- 
quoted enumeration of Phil, iv, 8; ‘‘ Whatsoever things 


% 


v. 22, 23] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 377 


are true, whatsoever things are reverend, whatsoever 
things are just, whatsoever things are chaste, whatso- 
ever things are lovely, whatsoever things are kindly 
spoken, if there be any virtue, and if there be any 
praise, think on these things.” These representations 
de not pretend to theoretical completeness. It would 
be easy to specify important virtues not mentioned 
in the Apostle’s categories. His descriptions have a 
practical aim, and press on the attention of his readers 
the special forms and qualities of virtue demanded 
frem them, under the given circumstances, by their 
faith in Christ. 

It is interesting to compare the Apostle’s definitions 
with Plato’s celebrated scheme of the four cardinal 
virtues. They are wisdom, courage, temperance, with 
righteousness as the union and co-ordination of the 
other three. The difference between the cast of the 
Platonic and Pauline ethics is most instructive. In the 
Apostle’s catalogue the first two of the philosophical 
virtues are wanting; unless “ courage” be included, as 
it properly may, under the name of “virtue” in the 
Philippian list. With the Greek thinker, wisdom is 
the fundamental exeellence of the soul. Knowledge is 
in his view the supreme desideratum, the guarantee for 
moral health and social well-being. The philosopher 
is the perfect man, the proper ruler of the common- 
wealth. Intellectual culture brings in its train ethical 
improvement. For “no man is knowingly vicious:” 
such was the dictum of Socrates, the father of Philo- 
sophy. In the ethics of the gospel, /ove becomes the 
chief of virtues, parent of the rest. 

Love and humility are the two features whose 
predominance distinguishes the Christian from the 
purest classical conceptions of moral worth. The 


“a 


ethics of Naturalism know love as a passion, a sensuous 
instinct (€pws); or again, as the personal affection 
which binds friend to friend through common interest 
or resemblance of taste and disposition (pia). Love 
in its highest sense (dyd7n) Christianity has re-dis- 
covered, finding in it a universal law for the reason 
and spirit. It assigns to this principle a like place to 
that which gravitation holds in the material universe, 
as the attraction which binds each man to his Maker 
and to his fellows. Its obligations neutralise self- 
interest and create a spiritual solidarity of mankind, 
centring in Christ, the God-man.  Pre-Christian 
philosophy exalted the intellect, but left the heart cold 
and vacant, and the deeper springs of will untouched. 
It was reserved for Jesus Christ to teach men how to 
love, and in love to find the law of freedom. 

If love was wanting in natural ethics, humility was 
positively excluded. The pride of philosophy regarded 
it as a vice rather than a virtue. “ Lowliness” is 
ranked with “ pettiness” and “repining” and “des- 
pondency” as the product of “littleness of soul.” 
On the contrary, the man of lofty soul is held up 
to admiration, who is “worthy of great things and 
deems himself so,”—who is ‘not given to wonder, for 
nothing seems great to him,’—who is “ashamed to 
receive benefits,” and “has the appearance indeed of 
being supercilious” (Aristotle). How far removed is 
this model from our Example who has said, “ Learn of 
Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.” The classical 
idea of virtue is based on the greatness of man; the 
Christian, on the goodness of God. Before the Divine 
glory in Jesus Christ the soul of the believer bows 
in adoration. It is humbled at the throne of grace, 
chastened into self-forgetting. It gazes on this Image 


378 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





v. 22, 23.] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 379 
of love and holiness, till it repeats itself within the 
‘heart. 


Nine virtues are woven together in this golden chain 
of the Holy Spirit's fruit. They fall into three groups 
of three, four, and two respectively—according as they 
refer primarily to.God, Jove, joy, peace; to one’s fellow- 
men, longsuffering, kindness, goodness, faith; and to 
oneself, meckness, temperance. But the successive 
qualities are so closely linked and pass into one 
another with so little distance, that it is undesirable to 
emphasize the analysis ; and while bearing the above 
distinctions in mind, we shall seek to give to each of 
the nine graces its separate place in the catalogue. 

1. The fruit of the Spirit is love. That fitliest first. 
Love is the Alpha and Omega of the Apostle’s thoughts 
concerning the new life in Christ. This queen of 
graces is already enthroned within this chapter. In 
ver. 6 Love came forward to be the minister of Faith ; 
in ver. 14 it reappeared as the ruling principle of Divine 
law. These two offices of love are united here, where 
it becomes the prime fruit of the Holy Spirit of God, 
to whom the heart is opened by the act of faith, and 
who enables us to keep God’s law. Love is “the 
fulfilling of the law;” for it is the essence of the 
gospel ; it is the spirit of sonship; without this Divine 
affection, no profession of faith, no practice of good 
works has any value in the sight of God or intrinsic 
moral worth. Though I have all other gifts and merits 
—wanting this, “I am nothing” (1 Cor. xiii. I—3). 
The cold heart is dead. Whatever appears to be 
Christian that has not the love of Christ, is an unreality 
—a matter of orthodox opinion or mechanical per- 
formance—dead as the body without the spirit. In all 


380 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
$e 
true goodness there is an element of love. Here then 
is the fountain-head of Christian virtue, the “ well of 
water springing up into eternal life” which Christ 
opens in the believing soul, from which flow so many 
bounteous streams of mercy and good fruits. 

This love is, in the first instance and above all, Jove 
to God. It springs from the knowledge of His love to 
man. “God is love,” and “love is of God” (1 John iv. 
7, 8). All love flows from one fountain, from the One 
Father. And the Father's love is revealed in the Son. 
Love has the cross for its measure and standard. 
“He sent the Only-begotten into the world, that we 
might live through Him. Herein is love: hereby know 
we love” (1 John iii. 16; iv. 9, 10). The man who 
knows this love, whose heart responds to the manifes- 
tation of God in Christ, is “born of God.” His soul 
is ready to become the abode of all pure affections, his 
life the exhibition of all Christ-like virtues. For the 
love of the Father is revealed to him; and the love of 
a son is enkindled in his soul by the Spirit of the Son. 

In Paul’s teaching, love forms the antithesis to know- 
ledge. By this opposition the wisdom of God is dis- 
tinguished from “the wisdom of this world and of its 
princes, which come to nought” (1 Cor. i. 23; ii. 8; 
viii. I, 3). Not that love despises knowledge, or seeks 
to dispense with it. It requires knowledge beforehand 
in order to discern its object, and afterwards to under- 
stand its work. So the Apostle prays for the Philip- 
pians “that their love may abound yet more and more 
in knowledge and all discernment” (ch. i. 9, 10). It 
is not /ove without knowledge, heat without light, the 
warmth of an ignorant, untempered zeal that the 
Apostle desiderates. But he deplores the existence of 
knowledge without love, a clear head with a cold heart, 





Vv. 22 23.] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 381 


an intellect whose growth has left the affections starved 
and stunted, with enlightened apprehensions of truth 
that awaken no corresponding emotions, Hence comes 
the pride of reason, the “ knowledge that puffeth up.” 
Love alone knows the art of building up. 

Loveless knowledge is not wisdom. For wisdom is 
lowly in her own eyes, mild and gracious. What the 
man of cold intellect sees, he sees clearly ; he reasons 
on it well. But his data are defective. He discerns 
but the half, the poorer half of life. There is a whole 
heaven of facts of which he takes no account. He has 
an acute and sensitive perception of phenomena coming 
within the range of his five senses, and of everything 
that logic can elicit from such phenomena. But he 
“cannot see afar off.” Above all, “he that loveth not, 
knoweth not God.” He leaves out the Supreme Factor 
in human life; and all his calculations are vitiated. 
“ Hath not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” 

If knowledge then is the enlightened eye, love is the 
throbbing, living heart of Christian goodness. 

2. The fruit of the Spirit ts joy. Joy dwells in the 
house of Love; nor elsewhere will she tarry. 

Love is the mistress both of joy and sorrow. 
Wronged, frustrated, hers is the bitterest of griefs. 
Love makes us capable of pain and shame ; but equally 
of triumph and delight. Therefore the Lover of man- 
kind was the “ Man of sorrows,” whose love bared its 
breast to the arrows of scorn and hate; and yet “ for 
the joy that was set before Him, He endured the cross, 
despising the shame.” There was no sorrow like that 
of Christ rejected and crucified; no joy like the joy of 
Christ risen and reigning. This joy, the delight of 
love satisfied in those it loves, is that whose fulfilment 
He has promised to His disciples (John xv. 8—11). 





382 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Such joy the selfish heart never knows. Life's 
choicest blessings, heaven’s highest favours fail to bring 
it happiness. Sensuous gratification, and even in- 
tellectual pleasure by itself wants the true note of 
gladness. There is nothing that thrills the whole 
nature, that stirs the pulses of life and sets them 
dancing, like the touch of a pure love. It is the pearl 
of great price, for which “if a man would give all 
the substance of his house, he would be utterly con- 
temned.” But of all the joys love gives to life, that 
is the deepest which is ours when “the love of God 
is shed abroad in otr heart.” Then the full tide 
of blessedness pours into the human spirit. Then 
we know of what happiness our nature was made 
capable, when we know the love that God hath 
toward us. 

This joy in the Lord quickens and elevates, while 
it cleanses, all other emotions. It raises the whole 
temperature of the heart. It gives a.new glow to life. 
It lends a warmer and a purer tone to our natural 
affections. It sheds a diviner meaning, a brighter 
aspect over the common face of earth and sky. It 
throws a radiance of hope upon the toils and weariness 
of mortality. It “glories in tribulation.” It triumphs 
in death. He who “‘lives in the Spirit” cannot be a 
dull, or peevish, or melancholy man. One with Christ 
his heavenly Lord, he begins already to taste His joy, 
—a joy which none taketh away and which many 
sorrows cannot quench. 

Joy is the beaming countenance, the elastic step, the 
singing voice of Christian goodness. 

3. But joy is a thing of seasons. It has its ebb and 
flow, and would not be itself if it were constant. It 
is crossed, varied, shadowed unceasingly. On earth 


' 


v.22, 23] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 383 





sorrow ever follows in its track, as mght chases day. No 
one knew this better than Paul. “ Sorrowful,” he says 
of himself (2 Cor. vi. 10), “yet always rejoicing:” a 
continual alternation, sorrow threatening every moment 
to extinguish, but serving to enhance his joy. Joy 
leans upon her graver sister Peace. 

There is nothing fitful or febrile in the quality of 
Peace. It is a settled quict of the heart, a deep, 
brooding mystery that “ passeth all understanding,” 
the stillness of eternity entering the spirit, the Sabbath 
of God (Heb. iv. 9). It is theirs who are “‘justified by 
faith” (Rom. v. I, 2). Itis the bequest of Jesus Christ 
(John xiv. 27). He “made peace for us through the 
blood of His cross.” He has reconciled us with the 
eternal law, with the Will that rules all things without 
effort or disturbance. We pass from the region of 
misrule and mad rebellion into the kingdom of the 
Son of God’s love, with its ordered freedom, its clear 
and tranquil light, its ‘‘ central peace, subsisting at the 
heart of endless agitation.” 

After the war of the passions, after the tempests of 
doubt and fear, Christ has spoken, “‘ Peace, be still!” 
A great calm spreads over the troubled waters; wind 
and wave lie down hushed at His feet. The demonic 
powers that lashed the soul into tumult, vanish before 
His holy presence. The Spirit of Jesus takes posses- 
sion of mind and heart and will. And His fruit is 
peace—always peace. This one virtue takes the place 
of the manifold forms of contention which make life a 
chaos and a misery. While He rules, “the peace of 
God guards the heart and thoughts” and holds them 
safe from inward mutiny or outward assault; and the 
dissolute, turbulent train of the works of the flesh 
find the gates of the soul barred against them. 


384 THE EPISTLE T0 THE GALATIANS. 





Peace is the calm, unruffled brow, the poised and 
even temper which Christian goodness wears. 

4. The heart at peace with God has patience with 
men. “Charity suffereth long.” She is not provoked 
by opposition ; nor soured by injustice; no, nor crushed 
by men’s contempt. She can afford to wait; for truth 
and love will conquer in theend. She knows in whose 
hand her cause is, and remembers how long He has 
suffered the unbelief and rebellion of an insensate 
world; she “ considers Him that endured such contra- 
diction of sinners against Himself.” Mercy and long- 
suffering are qualities that we share with God Himself, 
in which God was, and is, “ manifest in the flesh.” In 
this ripe fruit of the Spirit there are joined “ the love 
of God, and the patience of Christ” (2 Thess. iii. 5). 

Longsuffering is the patient magnanimity of Christ- 
ian goodness, the broad shoulders on which it “beareth 
all things” (1 Cor. xiii. 7). 

5. “Charity suffereth long and ts kind.” 

Gentleness (or kindness, as the word is more fre- 
quently and better rendered,) resembles “longsuffering” 
in finding its chief objects in the evil and unthankful. 
But while the latter is passive and self-contained, kind- 
ness is an active, busy virtue. She is moreover of a 
humble and tender spirit, stooping to the lowest need, 
thinking nothing too small in which she may help, 
ready to give back blessing for cursing, benefit for 
harm and wrong. 

_ Kindness is the thoughtful insight, the delicate tact, 
the gentle ministering hand of Charity. 

6. Linked with kindness comes goodness, which is its 
other self, differing from it only as twin sisters may, 
each fairer for the beauty of the other. Goodness 
is perhaps more affluent, more catholic in its bounty; 








v.22, 23.] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 385 


kindness more delicate and discriminating. The former 
looks to the benefit conferred, seeking to make it as 
large and full as possible; the latter has respect to the 
recipients, and studies to suit their necessity. While 
kindness makes its opportunities, and seeks out the 
most needy and miserable, goodness throws its doors 
open to all comers. Goodness is the more masculine 
and large-hearted form of charity ; and if it errs, errs 
through blundering and want of tact. Kindness is 
the more feminine; and may err through exclusiveness 
and narrowness of view. United, they are perfect. 

Goodness is the honest, generous face, the open hand 
of Charity. 

7. This procession of the Virtues has conducted us, 
in the order of Divine grace, from the thought of a 
loving, forgiving God, the Object of our /ove, our joy 
and peace, to that of an evil-doing, unhappy world, with 
its need of /ongsuffering and kindness; and we now 
come to the inner, sacred circle of brethren beloved in 
Christ, where, with goodness, fatth—that is, trustfulness, 
confidence—is called into exercise. 

The Authorised rendering “faith” seems to us in 
this instance preferable to the “ faithfulness” of the 
Revisers. “ Possibly,” says Bishop Lightfoot, “ riavis 
may here signify ‘trustfulness, reliance,’ in one’s 
dealings with others ; comp. I Cor. xiii. 7:” we should 
prefer to say “probably,” or even “unmistakably,” to 
this. The use of pzséis in any other sense is rare and 
doubtful in Paul’s Epistles. It is true that “God” or 
“Christ” is elsewhere implied as the object of faith ; 
but where the word stands, as it does here, in a series 
of qualities belonging to human relationships, it finds, 
in agreement with its current meaning, another applica- 
tion. Asa link between goodness and meckness, trust- 


25 


386 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





fulness, and nothing else, appears to be in place. The 
parallel expression of 1 Cor. xiii., of which chapter we 
find so many echoes in the text, we take to be decisive: 
“Charity believeth all things.” 

The faith that unites man to God, in turn joins man 
to his fellows. Faith in the Divine Fatherhood becomes 
trust in the human brotherhood. In this generous 
attribute the Galatians were sadly deficient. “ Honour 
all men,” wrote Peter to them ; ‘‘love the brotherhood” 
(1 Pet. ii. 17). Their factiousness and jealousies were 
the exact opposite of this fruit of the Spirit. Little was 
there to be found in them of the love that “ envieth and 
vaunteth not,” which ‘imputeth not evil, nor rejoiceth 
in unrighteousness,” which “ beareth, believeth, hopeth, 
endureth all things.” They needed more faith in man, 
as well as in God. 

The true heart knows how to évust. He who doubts 
every one is even more deceived than the man who 
blindly confides in every one. There is no more miser- 
able vice than cynicism; no man more ill-conditioned 
than he who counts all the world knaves or fools except 
himself. This poison of mistrust, this biting acid of 
scepticism is a fruit of irreligion. It is one of the surest 
signs of social and national decay. 

The Christian man knows not only how to stand 
alone and to ‘bear all things,” but also how to lean 
on others, strengthening himself by their strength and 
supporting them in weakness. He delights to “ think 
others better” than himself; and here ‘“‘ meekness” is 
one with “faith.” His own goodness gives him an eye 
for everything that is best in those around him. 

Trustfulness is the warm, firm clasp of friendship, 
the generous and loyal homage which goodness ever 
pays to goodness, 






V. 22, 23.] THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 387 


8. Meekness, as we have seen, is the other side of 
faith. It is not tameness and want of spirit, as those 
who “judge after the flesh” are apt to think. Nor is 
meekness the mere quietness of a retiring disposition. 
“The man Moses was very meek, above all the men 
which were upon the face of the earth.” It comports. 
with the highest courage and activity ; and is a qualifi- 
cation for public leadership. Jesus Christ stands before 
us as the perfect patternof meekness. ‘I intreat you,” 
pleads the Apostle with the self-asserting Corinthians, 
“by the meekness and gentleness of Christ!” Meek- 
ness is self-repression in view of the claims and needs 
of others; it is the “charity” which “ seeketh not her 
own, looketh not to her own things, but to the things 
of others.” For her, self is of no account in comparison 
with Christ and His kingdom, and the honour of His 
brethren. 

Meekness is the content and quiet mien, the willing 
self-effacement that is the mark of Christlike goodness. 

g. Finally temperance, or se/f-control,—third of Plato’s 
cardinal virtues. 

By this last link the chain of the virtues, at its higher 
end attached to the throne of the Divine love and 
mercy, is fastened firmly down into the actualities of 
daily habit and bodily regimen. Temperance, to change 
the figure, closes the array of the graces, holding the 
post of the rear-guard which checks all straggling and 
protects the march from surprise and treacherous over- 
throw. 

If meekness is the virtue of the whole man as he 
stands before his God and in the midst of his fellows, 
temperance is that of his body, the tenement and instru- 
ment of the regenerate spirit. It is the antithesis of 
“drunkenness and revellings,” which closed the list of 


388 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


“works of the flesh,” just as the preceding graces, from 
“ peace” to “ meekness,” are opposed to the multiplied 
forms of ‘‘enmity” and “ strife.” Amongst ourselves 
very commonly the same limited contrast isimplied. But 
to make “temperance” signify only or chiefly the 
avoidance of strong drink is miserably to narrow its 
significance. It covers the whole range of moral dis- 
cipline, and concerns every sense and passion of our 
nature. Temperance is a practised mastery of self. It 
holds the reins of the chariot of life. It is the steady 
and prompt control of the outlooking sensibilities and 
appetencies, and inwardly moving desires. The tongue, 
the hand and foot, the eye, the temper, the tastes and 
affections, all require in turn to feel its curb. He isa 
temperate man, in the Apostle’s meaning, who holds 
himself well in hand, who meets temptation as a dis- 
ciplined army meets the shock of battle, by skill and 
alertness and tempered courage baffling the forces that 
outnumber it. 

This also is a “fruit of the Spirit ”—though we may 
count it the lowest and least, yet as indispensable to 


our salvation as the love of Ged itself. For the lack of 


this safeguard how many a saint has stumbled into 
folly and shame! It is no small thing for the Holy 
Spirit to accomplish in us, no mean prize for which we 
strive in seeking the crown of a perfect self-control. 
This mastery over the flesh is in truth the rightful 
prerogative of the human spirit, the dignity from which 
it fell through sin, and which the gift of the Spirit of 
Christ restores. 

And this virtue in a Christian man is exercised for 
the behoof of others, as well as for his own. “I keep 
my body under,” cries the Apostle, ‘‘I make it my 
slave and not my master; lest, having preached to 





! 


V. 22, 23.) THE FRUIT OF THE SPIRIT. 389 


others, I myself should be a castaway ””—that is self- 
regard, mere common prudence ; but again, “It is good 
not to eat flesh, nor drink wine, nor to do anything 
whereby a brother is made to stumble or made weak” 
(1 Cor, ix. 27; Rom. xiv. 21). 

Temperance is the guarded step, the sober, measured 
walk in which Christian goodness keeps the way of life, 
and makes straight paths for stumbling and straying 
feet. 


CHAPTER XXVI. : 


OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 


“Brethren, even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye which 
are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of meekness; looking to 
thyself, lest thou also be tempted. Bear ye one another’s burdens, 
and so fulfil the law of Christ. For if a man thinketh himself to be 
something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself, But let each 
man prove his own work, and then shall he have his glorying in 
regard of himself alone, and not of his neighbour. For each man 
shall bear his own burden.”—Gat. vi. I—5. 


HE division of the chapters at this point is almost 
as unfortunate as that between chaps. iv. and v. 
The introductory “‘ Brethren” is not a form of transi- 
tion to a new topic; it calls in the brotherly love of 
the Galatians to put an end to the bickerings and 
recriminations which the Apostle has censured in the 
preceding verses. How unseemly for brethren to be 
“vainglorious ” towards each other, to be “‘ provoking 
and envying one another!” If they are spiritual men, 
they should look more considerately on the faults of 
their neighbours, more seriously on their own responsi- 
bilities. 

The Galatic temperament, as we have seen, was 
prone to the mischievous vanity which the Apostle 
here reproves. Those who had, or fancied they had, 
some superiority over others in talent or in character, 
prided themselves upon it. Even spiritual gifts were 
made matter of ostentation; and display on the part __ 





vi.t-5.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 391 


of the more gifted excited the jealousy of inferior 
brethren. The same disposition which manifests itself 
in arrogance on the one side, on the other takes the 
form of discontent and envy. The heart-burnings and 
the social tension which this state of things creates, 
make every chance collision a danger; and the 
slightest wound is inflamed into a rankling sore. The 
stumbling brother is pushed on into a fall; and the 
fallen man, who might have been helped to his feet, 
is left to lie there, the object of unpitying reproach. 
Indeed, the lapse of his neighbour is to the vain- 
glorious man a cause of satisfaction rather than of 
sorrow. The other’s weakness serves for a foil to his 
strength. Instead of stooping down to “restore such 
a one,” he holds stiffly aloof in the eminence of con- 
scious virtue ; and bears himself more proudly in the 
lustre added to his piety by his fellow’s disgrace. 
“God, I thank Thee,” he seems to say, ‘that I am 
not as other men,—nor even as this wretched back- 
slider!” The compellation “Brethren” is itself a 
rebuke to such heartless pride. 

There are two reflections which should instantly 
correct the spirit of vain-glory. The Apostle appeais 
in the first place to brotherly love, to the claims that an 
erring fellow-Christian has upon our sympathy, to the 
meekness and forbearance which the Spirit of grace 
inspires, in fine to Christ’s law which makes compas- 
sion our duty. At the same time he points out to 
us our own infirmity and exposure to temptation. He 
reminds us of the weight of our individual respon- 
sibility and the final account awaiting us. A proper 
sense at once of the rights of others and of our own 
obligations will make this shallow vanity impossible. 

This double-edged exhortation takes shape in two 


392 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


leading sentences, sharply clashing with each other 
in the style of paradox in which the Apostle loves to 
contrast the opposite sides of truth: “Bear ye one 
anothers burdens” (ver. 2); and yet “Every man 
shall bear his own burden” (ver. 5). 

I. What then are the considerations that commend 
the burdens of others for our bearing ? 

The burden the Apostle has in view is that of @ 
brothers trespass: “ Brethren, if a man be overtaken 
in some trespass.” 

Here the question arises as to whether Paul means 
overtaken by the temptation, or by the discovery of his 
sin—surprised into committing, or 7 committing the 
trespass. Winer, Lightfoot, and some other inter- 
preters, read the words in the latter sense: “ surprised, 
detected in the act of committing any sin, so that his 
guilt is placed beyond a doubt” (Lightfoot). We are 
persuaded, notwithstanding, that the common view of 
the text is the correct one. The manner of the 
offender’s detection has little to do with the way in 
which he should be treated; but the circumstances of 
his fall have everything to do with it. The sudden- 
ness, the surprise of his temptation is both a reason 
for more lenient judgment, and a ground for hope of 
his restoration. The preposition “in” (év), it is 
urged, stands in the way of this interpretation. We 
might have expected to read “(surprised) dy,” or 
perhaps “‘i#fo (any sin).” But the word is “ trespass,” 
not “sin.” It points not to the cause of the man’s 
fall, but to the condition in which it has placed him. 
The Greek preposition (according to a well known 
idiom of verbs of motion)* indicates the result of the 


* For this pregnant force of é see the grammarians; Moulton’s 
Winer, pp. 514, 5; A. Buttmann, pp. 328, 9. (Eng. Ver.). 





vi I-§.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 393 





unexpected assault to which the man has been subject. 
A gust of temptation has caught him unawares ; and 
we now see him lying overthrown and prostrate, in- 
volved “in some trespass.” 

The Apostle is supposing an instance—possibly an 
actual case—in which the sin committed was due to 
weakness and surprise, rather than deliberate inten- 
tion; like that of Eve, when “the woman being 
beguiled fell into transgression.”* Such a fall deserves 
commiseration. The attack was unlooked for; the 
man was off his guard. The Gallic nature is heedless 
and impulsive. Men of this temperament should make 
allowance for each other. An offence committed in a 
rash moment, under provocation, must not be visited 
with implacable severity, nor magnified until it become 
a fatal barrier between the evil-doer and society. And 
Paul says expressly, “If @ man be overtaken”—a 
delicate reminder of our human infirmity and common 
danger (comp. I Cor. x. 13). Let us remember that 
it is a man who has erred, of like passions with 
ourselves ; and his trespass will excite pity for him, 
and apprehension for ourselves. 

Such an effect the occurrence should have upon “ the 
spiritual,” on the men of love and peace, who “ walk 
in the Spirit.” The Apostle’s appeal is qualified by 
this definition. Vain and self-seeking men, the 
irritable, the resentful, are otherwise affected by a 
neighbour’s trespass. They will be angry with him, 
lavish in virtuous scorn; but it is not in them to 
“restore such a one.” They are more likely to aggra- 
vate than heal the wound, to push the weak man down 
when he tries to rise, than to help him to his feet. 





* 1 Tim. ii. 14: the expression is parallel in point of grammar, as 
well as sense; yéyovey év wapaBace, 





394 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


The work of restoration needs a knowledge of the 
human heart, a self-restraint and patient skill, quite 
beyond their capability. 

The restoration here signified, denotes not only, or 
not so much, the man’s inward, spiritual renewal, as 
his recovery for the Church, the mending of the rent 
caused by his removal. In 1 Cor. i. 10; 2 Cor. xiii. 
11; I Thess. iii, 10, where, as in other places, the 
English verb “ perfect” enters into the rendering of 
kataptifw, it gives the idea of re-adjustment, the right 
fitting of part to part, member to member, in some 
larger whole. Writing to the Corinthian Church at 
this time respecting a flagrant trespass committed 
there, for which the transgressor was now penitent, 
the Apostle bids its members ‘confirm their love” 
to him (2 Cor. ii. 5—11). So here “the spiritual” 
amongst the Galatians are urged to make it their 
business to set right the lapsed brother, to bring him 
back as soon and safely as might be to the fold of 
Christ. 

Of all the fruits of the Spirit, meekness is most 
required for this office of restoration, the meekness 
of Christ the Good Shepherd—of Paul who was 
“gentle as a nurse” amongst his children, and even 
against the worst offenders preferred to ‘‘come in love 
and a spirit of meekness,” rather than ‘‘ with a rod” 
(1 Thess. ii. 7; 1 Cor. iv. 21). To reprove without 
pride or acrimony, to stoop to the fallen without the 
air of condescension, requires the “ spirit of meekness” 
in a singular degree. Such a bearing lends peculiar 
grace to compassion. This “ gentleness of Christ” is 
one of the finest and rarest marks of the spiritual man, 
The moroseness sometimes associated with religious 
zeal, the disposition to judge hardly the failings of 


vi. 1-5.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 395 


weaker men is anything but according to Christ. 
It is written of Him, ‘“‘A bruised reed shall He not 
break, and the smoking flax shall He not quench” 
(Isa. xlii. 3; Matt. xii. 20). 

Meekness becomes sinful men dealing with fellow- 
sinners. “ Considering (thyse/f)’ says the Apostle, 
“lest thou also be tempted.” It is a noticeable thing 
that men morally weak in any given direction are apt 
to be the severest judges of those who err in the same 
respect, just as people who have risen out of poverty 
are often the harshest towards the poor. They wish 
to forget their own past, and hate to be reminded of a 
condition from which they have suffered. Or is the 
judge, in sentencing a kindred offender, seeking to rein- 
force his own conscience and to give a warning to 
himself? One is inclined sometimes to think so. But 
reflection on our own infirmities should counteract, 
instead of fostering censoriousness. Every man knows 
enough of himself to make him chary of denouncing 
others. ‘‘ Look to ¢hyse/f,” cries the Apostle. ‘ Thou 
hast considered thy brother’s faults. Now turn thine 
eye inward, and contemplate thine own. Hast thou 
never aforetime committed the offence with which he 
stands charged; or haply yielded to the like tempta- 
tion in a less degree ? Or if not even that, it may be 
thou art guilty of sins of another kind, though hidden 
from human sight, in the eyes of God no less heinous.” 
“ Judge not,” said the Judge of all the earth, “lest ye 
be judged. With what measure ye mete, it shall be 
measured unto you” (Matt. vii. I—5). 

This exhortation begins in general terms; but in the 
latter clause of ver. I it passes into the individualising 
singular —“ looking to thyself, lest even thou be tempted.” 
The disaster befalling one reveals the common peril ; 


356 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





it is a signal for every member of the Church to take 
heed to himself. The scrutiny which it calls for be- 
longs to each man’s private conscience. And the faith- 
fulness and integrity required in those who approach 
the wrongdoer with a view to his recovery, must be 
chastened by personal solicitude. The fall of a Christ- 
ian brother should be in any case the occasion of 
heart-searching, and profound humiliation. Feelings of 
indifference towards him, much more of contempt, will 
prove the prelude of a worse overthrow for ourselves. 

The burden of a brother’s trespass is the most pain- 
ful that can devolve upon a Christian man. But this is 
not the only burden we bring upon each other. There 
are burdens of anxiety and sorrow, of personal infirmity, 
of family difficulty, of business embarrassment, infinite 
varieties and complications of trial in which the re- 
sources of brotherly sympathy are taxed. The injunc- 
tion of the Apostle has an unlimited range. That which 
burdens my friend and brother cannot be otherwise 
than a solicitude to me. Whatever it be that cripples 
him and hinders his running the race set before him, 
I am bound, according to the best of my judgement and 
ability, to assist him to overcome it. If I leave him to 
stagger on alone, to sink under his load when my 
shoulder might have eased it for him, the reproach 
will be mine. 

This is no work of supererogation, no matter of 
mere liking and choice. I am not at liberty to 
refuse to share the burdens of the brotherhood. 
“ Bear ye one another's burdens,” Paul says, ‘‘and so 
fulfil the law of Christ.” This law the Apostle has 
already cited and enforced against the contentions and 
jealousies rife in Galatia (ch. v. 14, 15). But it hasa 
further application. Christ’s law of love not only says, 





vi.t-5.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 397 


“Thou shalt not bite and devour ; thou shalt not pro- 
voke and envy thy brother;” but also, “Thou shalt 
help and comfort him, and regard his burden as thine 
own.” 

This law makes of the Church one body, with a 
solidarity of interests and obligations. It finds employ- 
ment and discipline for the energy of Christian freedom, 
in yoking it to the service of the over-burdened. It 
reveals the dignity and privilege of moral strength, 
which consist not in the enjoyment of its own supe- 
riority, but in its power to bear “ the infirmities of the 
weak.” This was the glory of Christ, who “ pleased 
not Himself” (Rom. xv. I—4). The Giver of the law 
is its great Example. “ Being in the form of God,” He 
“took the form of a servant,” that in love He might 
serve mankind; He “ became obedient, unto the death 
of the cross” (Phil. ii. 1—8). Justly is the inference 
drawn, “ We also ought to lay down our lives for the 
brethren” (1 John iii. 16). There is no limit to the 
service which the redeemed brotherhood of Christ may 
expect from its members. 

Only this law must not be abused by the indolent 
and the overreaching, by the men who are ready to 
throw their burdens on others and make every generous 
neighbour the victim of their dishonesty. It is the 
need not the demand of our brother which claims our 
help. We are bound to take care that it is his neces- 
sity to which we minister, not his imposture or his 
slothfulness. The warning that ‘each man shall bear 
his own burden” is addressed to those who receive, as 
well as to those who render aid in the common burden- 
bearing of the Church. 

II. The adjustment of social and individual duty is 
often far from easy, and requires the nicest discernment 


398 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








and moral tact. Both are brought into view in this 
paragraph, in its latter as well as in its former section. 
But in vv. I, 2 the need of others, in vv. 3—5 our 
personal responsibility forms the leading consideration. 
We see on the one hand, that a true self-regard teaches 
us to identify ourselves with the moral interests of 
others: while, on the other hand, a false regard to 
others is excluded (ver. 4) which disturbs the judgement 
to be formed respecting ourselves. The thought of his 
own burden to be borne by each man now comes to 
the front of the exhortation. 

Ver. 3 stands between the two counterpoised esti- 
mates. It is another shaft directed against Galatian 
vain-glory, and pointed with Paul’s keenest irony. “For 
if a man thinketh he is something, being nothing he 
deceiveth himself.” 

This truth is very evident. But what is its bearing 
on the matter in hand? The maxim is advanced to 
support the foregoing admonition. It was their self- 
conceit that led some of the Apostle’s readers to treat 
with contempt the brother who had trespassed ; he tells 
them that this opinion of theirs is a de/usion, a kind of 
mental hallucination (¢pevarrarad éavtov). It betrays 
a melancholy ignorance. The “ spiritual” man who 
“thinks himself to be something,” says to you, “I am 
quite above these weak brethren, as you see. Their 
habits of life, their temptations are not mine. Their sym- 
pathy would be useless to me. And I shall not burden 
myself with their feebleness, nor vex myself with their 
ignorance and rudeness.” If any man separates himself 
from the Christian commonalty and breaks the ties of 
religious fellowship on grounds of this sort, and yet 
imagines he is following Christ, he “deceives himself.” 
Others will see how little his aflected eminence is worth. 


vi. I-5.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OIVN. 399 


Some will humour his vanity; many will ridicule or 
pity it; few will be deceived by it. 

The fact of a man’s “thinking himself to be some- 
thing” goes far to prove that he “is nothing.” ‘ Woe 
unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent 
in their own sight.” Real knowledge is humble; it 
knows its nothingness. Socrates, when the oracle 
pronounced him the wisest man in Greece, at last dis- 
covered that the response was right, inasmuch as he 
alone was aware that he knew nothing, while other 
men were confident of their knowledge. And a greater 
than Socrates, our All-wise, All-holy Saviour, says to 
us, ‘ Learn of Me, for I am meek and lowly in heart.” 
It is in humility and dependence, in self-forgetting that 
true wisdom begins. Who are we, although the most 
refined or highest in place, that we should despise plain, 
uncultured members of the Church, those who bear 
life’s heavier burdens and amongst whom our Saviour 
spent His days on earth, and treat them as unfit for our 
company, unworthy of fellowship with us in Christ ? 

They are themselves the greatest losers who neglect 
to fulfil Christ’s law. Such men might learn from their 
humbler brethren, accustomed to the trials and tempta- 
tions of a working life and a rough world, how to bear 
more worthily their own burdens. How foolish of 
“the eye to say to the hand” or “ foot, I have no need 
of thee!” ‘‘God hath chosen the poor of this world 
rich in faith.” There are truths of which they are our 
best teachers—priceless lessons of the power of Divine 
grace and the deep things of Christian experience. 
This isolation robs the poorer members of the Church 
in their turn of the manifold help due to them from 
communion with those more happily circumstanced. 
How many of the evils around us would be ameliorated, 


400 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








how many of our difficulties would vanish, if we could 
bring about a truer Christian fraternisation, if caste- 
feeling in our English Church-life were once destroyed, 
if men would lay aside their stiffness and social hau- 
teur, and cease to think that they “ are something” on 
grounds of worldly distinction and wealth which in 
Christ are absolutely nothing. 

The vain conceit of their superiority indulged in by 
some of his readers, the Apostle further corrects by 
reminding the self-deceivers of their own responsibility. 
The irony of ver. 3 passes into a sterner tone of 
warning in vv. 4 and 5. ‘Let each man try his 
own work,” he cries. “ Judge yourselves, instead of 
judging one another. Mind your own duty, rather 
than your neighbours’ faults. Do not think of your 
worth or talents in comparison with theirs; but see to 
it that your work is right.” The question for each of us 
is not, What do others fail to do? but, What am I 
myself really doing ? What will my life’s work amount 
to, when measured by that which God expects from 
me ? . 

This question shuts each man up within his own 
conscience. It anticipates the final judgement-day. 
‘‘ Every one of us must give account of himself to God” 
(Rom. xiv. 12). Reference to the conduct of others is 
here out of place. The petty comparisons which feed 
our vanity and our class-prejudices are of no avail at 
the bar of God. I may be able for every fault of my 
own to find some one else more faulty. But this makes 
me no whit better. It is the intrinsic, not the compara- 
tive worth of character and daily work of which God 
takes account. If we study our brother’s work, it 
should be with a view to enable him to do it better, or 
to learn to improve our own by his example; not 


vi.I-5.] OUR BROTHER'S BURDEN AND OUR OWN. 401 





in order to find excuses for ourselves in his short- 
comings. 

“And then ”—if our work abide the test—“‘ we shall 
have our glorying in ourselves alone, not in regard to 
our neighbour.” Not his flaws and failures, but my own 
honest work will be the ground of my satisfaction. 
This was Paul’s “glorying” in face of the slanders 
by which he was incessantly pursued. It lay in the 
testimony of his conscience. He lived under the 
severest self-scrutiny. He knew himself as the man 
only can who “knows the fear of the Lord,” who 
places himself every day before the dread tribunal of 
Christ Jesus. He is “ made manifest unto God;” and 
in the light of that searching Presence he can affirm 
that he “knows nothing against himself.” * But this 
boast makes him humble. “ By the grace of God” he 
is enabled to “have his conversation in the world in 
holiness and sincerity coming of God.” If he had 
seemed to claim any credit for himself; he at once 
corrects the thought: ‘Yet not I,” he says, “but God’s 
- grace that was with me. I have my glorying in Christ 
Jesus in the things pertaining to God, in that which 
Christ hath wrought in me” (1 Cor. xv. 10; Rom. xv. 
16—19Q). 

So that this boast of the Apostle, in which he 
invites the vainglorious Galatians to secure a share, 
resolves itself after all into his one boast, “in the cross 
of our Lord Jesus Christ” (ver. 14). If his work on 
trial should prove to be gold, “abiding” amongst the 
world’s imperishable treasures and fixed foundations 
of truth (1 Cor. iii. 10—15), Christ only was to be 
praised for this. Paul’s glorying is the opposite of the 


* 1 Cor. iv. I—5; 2 Cor. i. 12; v., 10o—12. 


26 


402 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





Legalist’s, who presumes on his “ works” as his own 
achievements, commending him for righteous before 
God. “ Justified by works,” such a man hath “ whereof 
to glory, but not toward God ” (Rom. iv. 2). His boast- 
ing redounds to himself. Whatever glory belongs to the 
work of the Christian must be referred to God. Such 
work furnishes no ground for magnifying the man at the 
expense of his fellows. If we praise the stream, it is to 
commend the fountain. If we admire the lives of the 
saints and celebrate the deeds of the heroes of faith, 
it is ad majorem Dei gloriam—“ that in all things God 
may be glorified through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet. iv. 11). 

“For each will bear his own load.” Here is the 
ultimate reason for the self-examination to which the 
Apostle has been urging his readers, in order to restrain 
their vanity. The emphatic repetition of the words 
each man in vv. 4 and 5 brings out impressively the 
personal character of the account to be rendered. At 
the same time; the deeper sense of our own burdens 
thus awakened will help to stir in us sympathy for 
the loads under which our fellows labour. So that this 
warning indirectly furthers the appeal for sympathy 
with which the chapter began. 

Faithful scrutiny of our work may give us reasons 
for satisfaction and gratitude towards God. But it 
will yield matter of another kind. It will call to 
remembrance old sins and follies, lost opportunities, 
wasted powers, with their burden of regret and humili- 
ation. It will set before us the array of our obligations, 
the manifold tasks committed to us by our heavenly 
Master, compelling us to say, ‘‘ Who is sufficient for 
these things ?” And beside the reproofs of the past and 
the stern demands of the present, there sounds in the 
soul’s ear the message of the future, the summons te 


vi.1-5.] OUR BROTHERS BURDEN AND OUR OWN 403 





our final reckoning. Each of us has his own life-load, 
made up of this triple burden. A thousand varying 
circumstances and individual experiences go to consti- 
tute the ever-growing load which we bear with us from 
youth to age, like the wayfarer his bundle, like the 
soldier his knapsack and accoutrements—the indivi- 
dual lot, the peculiar untransferable vocation and 
responsibility fastened by the hand of God upon our 
shoulders, This burden we shall have to carry up to 
Christ’s judgement-seat. He is our Master; He alone 
can give us our discharge. His lips must pronounce 
the final ‘‘ Well done ”—or, “ Thou wicked and slothful 
servant !” 

In this sentence the Apostle employs a different 
word from that used in ver. 2. There he was thinking 
of the weight, the burdensomeness of our brother's 
troubles, which we haply may lighten for him, and 
which is so far common property. But the second 
word, gopriov (applied for instance to a ship's lading), 
indicates that which ts proper to each in the burdens 
of life. There are duties that we have no power to 
devolve, cares and griefs that we must bear in secret, 
problems that we must work out severally and for 
ourselves. To consider them aright, to weigh well the 
sum of our duty will dash our self-complacency ; it will 
surely make us serious and humble. Let us wake 
up from dreams of self-pleasing to an earnest, manly 
apprehension of life’s demands—‘“ while,” like the 
Apostle, “we look not at the things which are seen, 
but at the things which are not seen and eternal” 
(2 Cor. iv. 18). 


After all, it is the men who have the highest standard 
for themselves that as a rule are most considerate in 


404 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


their estimate of others. The holiest are the most 
pitiful. They know best how to enter into the struggles 
of a weaker brother. They can appreciate his un- 
successful resistance to temptation; they can discern 
where and how he has failed, and how much of genuine 
sorrow there is in his remorse. From the fulness of 
their own experience they can interpret a possibility of 
better things in what excites contempt in those who 
judge by appearance and by conventional rules. He 
who has learned faithfully to “ consider himself” and 
meekly to “ bear his own burden,” is most fit to do 
the work of Christ, and to shepherd His tempted and 
straying sheep. Strict with ourselves, we shall grow 
wise and gentle in our care for others. 

In the Christian conscience the sense of personal 
and that of social responsibility serve each to stimulate 
and guard the other. Duty and sympathy, love and 
law are fused into one. For Christ is all in all; and 
these two hemispheres of life unite in Him. 





CHAPTER XXVII. 


SOWING AND REAPING. 


“But let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him 
that teacheth in all good things. Be not deceived; God is not 
mocked : for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For 
he that soweth unto his own flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption ; 
but he that soweth unto the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap eternal life. 
And let us not be weary in well-doing: for in due season we shall 
reap, if we faint not. So then, as we have opportunity, let us work 
that which is good toward all men, and especially toward them that 
are of the household of the faith ””—Gat. vi. 6—10, 


E ACH shall bear his own burden (ver. 5)—but let there 

be communion of disciple with teacher in all that is 
good. ‘The latter sentence is clearly intended to balance 
the former. The transition turns upon .the same 
antithesis between social and individual responsibility 
that occupied us in the foregoing Chapter. But it is 
now presented on another side. In the previous 
passage it concerned the conduct of ‘‘the spiritual” 
toward erring brethren whom they were tempted to 
despise ; here, their behaviour toward teachers whom 
they were disposed to neglect. There it is inferiors, 
here superiors that are in view. The Galatian “ vain- 
glory” manifested itself alike in provocation toward 
the former, and in envy toward the latter (ch. v. 26). 
In both ways it bred disaffection, and threatened to 
break up the Church’s unity. The two effects are 
perfectly consistent. Those who are harsh in their 


, 7 


406 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


dealings with the weak, are commonly rude and insub- 
ordinate toward their betters, where they dare to be 
so. Self-conceit and self-sufficiency engender in the 
one direction a cold contempt, in the other a jealous 
independence. The former error is corrected by a due 
sense of our own infirmities; the latter by the con- 
sideration of our responsibility to God. We are 
compelled to feel for the burdens of others when we 
realise the weight of our own. We learn to respect 
the claims of those placed over us, when we remember 
what we owe to God through them. Personal responsi- 
bility is the last word of the former paragraph ; social 
responsibility is the first word of this. Such is the 
contrast marked by the transitional But. 

From this point of view ver. 6 gains a very com- 
prehensive sense, ‘All good things” cannot surely 
be limited to the “carnal things” of 1 Cor. ix. 11, As 
Meyer and Beet amongst recent commentators clearly 
show, the context gives to this phrase a larger scope. 
At the same time, there is no necessity to exclude the 
thought of temporal good. The Apostle designedly 
makes his appeal as wide as possible. The reasoning 
of the corresponding passage in the Corinthian letter 
is a deduction from the general principle laid down 
here. 

But it is spiritual fellowship that the Apostle chiefly 
desiderates. The true minister of Christ counts this 
vastly more sacred, and has this interest far more at 
heart than his own temporalities. He labours for the 
unity of the Church; he strives to secure the mutual 
sympathy and co-operation of all orders and ranks 
teachers and taught, officers and private members—“ in 
every good word and work.” He must have the heart 
of his people with him in his work, or his joy will be 


vi. 6-10] SOWING AND REAPING. 407 


faint and his success scant indeed. Christian teaching 
is designed to awaken this sympathetic response. And 
it will take expression in the rendering of whatever 
kind of help the gifts and means of the hearer and 
the needs of the occasion call for. Paul requires every 
member of the Body of Christ to make her wants and 
toils his own. We have no right to leave the burdens 
of the Church’s work to her leaders, to expect her 
battles to be fought and won by the officers alone. 
This neglect has been the parent of innumerable 
mischiefs. Indolence in the laity fosters sacerdotalism 
in the clergy. But when, on the contrary, an active, 
sympathetic union is maintained between “him that is 
taught” and “‘him that teacheth,” that other matter of 
the temporal support of the Christian ministry, to which 
this text is so often exclusively referred, comes in as 
a necessary detail, to be generously and prudently 
arranged, but which will not be felt on either side as 
a burden or a difficulty. Everything depends on the 
fellowship of spirit, on the strength of the bond of love 
that knits together the members of the Body of Christ. 
Here, in Galatia, that bond had been grievously 
weakened. In a Church so disturbed, the fellowship 
of teachers and taught was inevitably strained. 

Such communion the Apostle craves from his children 
in the faith with an intense yearning. This is the one 
fruit of God’s grace in them which he covets to reap 
for himself, and feels he has a right to expect. “ Be 
ye as I am,” he cries—“ do not desert me, my children, 
for whom I travail in birth. Let me not have to toil 
for you in vain” (ch. iv. 12—19). So again, writing to 
the Corinthians: “It was J that begat you in Christ 
Jesus ; I beseech you then, be followers of me. Let me 
remind you of my ways in the Lord. ..O ye Cor- 





408 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


inthians, to you our mouth is open, our heart enlarged. 
Pay me back in kind (you are my children), and be ye 
too enlarged” (1 Cor. iv. 14—17; 2 Cor. vi. 11—13). 
He “thanks God” for the Philippians “on every 
remembrance of them,” and “ makes his supplication ” 
for them “with joy, because of their fellowship in 
regard to the gospel from the first day until now” 
(Phil. i. 3—7). Such is the fellowship which Paul 
wished to see restored in the Galatian Churches, 

In ver. 10 he extends his appeal to embrace in it all 
the kindly offices of life. For the love inspired by the 
Church, the service rendered to her, should quicken all 
our human sympathies and make us readier to meet 
every claim of pity or affection. While our sympathies, 
like those of a loving family, will be concerned “ espe- 
cially” with “the household of faith,” and within that 
circle more especially with our pastors and teachers in 
Christ, they have no limit but that of ‘ opportunity ;” 
they should “ work that which is good toward all men.” 
True zeal for the Church widens instead of narrowing, 
our charities. Household affection is the nursery, not 
the rival, of love to our fatherland and to humanity. 

Now the Apostle is extremely urgent in this matter 
of communion between teachers and taught. It con- 
cerns the very life of the Christian community. The 
welfare of the Church and the progress of the kingdom 
of God depend on the degree to which its individual 
members accept their responsibility in its affairs. IIl- 
will towards Christian teachers is paralyzing in its 
effects on the Church’s life. Greatly are they to blame, 
if their conduct gives rise to discontent. Only less 
severe is the condemnation of those in lower place who 
harbour in themselves and foster in the minds of others 
sentiments of disloyalty. To cherish this mistrust, to 


vi. 6-10] SOWING AND REAPING. 409 


withhold our sympathy from him who serves us in 
spiritual things, this, the Apostle declares, is not merely 
a wrong done to the man, it is an affront to God 
Himself. If it be God’s Word that His servant teaches, 
then God expects some fitting return to be made for 
the gift He has bestowed. Of that return the pecuniary 
contribution, the meed of “carnal things” with which 
so many seem to think their debt discharged, is often 
the least and easiest part. How far have men aright 
to be hearers—profited and believing hearers—in the 
Christian congregation, and yet decline the duties of 
Church fellowship? They eat the Church’s bread, 
but will not do her work. They expect like children 
to be fed and nursed and waited on; they think that 
if they pay their minister tolerably well, they have 
“communicated with” him quite sufficiently. This 
apathy has much the same effect as the Galatian 
bickerings and jealousies. It robs the Church of the 
help of the children whom she has nourished and 
brought up. Those who act thus are trying in reality 
to “mock God.” They expect Him to sow his bounties 
upon them, but will not let Him reap. They refuse 
Him the return that He most requires for His choicest 
benefits. 

Now, the Apostle says, God is not to be defrauded 
in this way. Men may wrong each other; they may 
grieve and affront His ministers. But no man is clever 
enough to cheat God. It is not Him, it is themselves 
they will prove to have deceived. Vain and selfish 
men who take the best that God and man can do for 
them as though it were a tribute to their greatness, 
envious and restless men who break the Church's 
fellowship of peace, will reap at last even as they sow. 
The mischief and the loss may fall on others now; but 





410 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. Sf 





in its full ripeness it will come in the end upon them- 
selves. The final reckoning awaits us in another world. 
And as we act by God and by His Church now, in our 
day, so He will act hereafter by us in His day. 

Thus the Apostle, in vv, 6 and 7, places this matter 
in the searching light of eternity. He brings to bear 
upon it one of the great spiritual maxims characteristic 
of his teaching. Paul’s unique influence as a religious 
teacher lies in his mastery of principles of this kind, 
in the keenness of insight and the incomparable vigour 
with which he applies eternal truths to commonplace 
occurrences. The paltriness and vulgarity of these 
local broils and disaffections lend to his warning a more 
severe impressiveness. With what a startling and 
sobering force, one thinks, the rebuke of these verses 
must have fallen on the ears of the wrangling Galatians! 
How unspeakably mean their quarrels appear in the 
light of the solemn issues opening out before them! 
It was God whom their folly had presumed to mock. 
It was the harvest of eternal life of which their factious- 
ness threatened to defraud them. 


The principle on which this warning rests is stated 
in terms that give it universal application: Whatso- 
ever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. This is 
in fact the postulate of all moral responsibility. It 
asserts the continuity of personal existence, the connec- 
tion of cause and effect in human character, It makes 
man the master of his own destiny. It declares that 
his future doom hangs upon his present choice, and is 
in truth its evolution and consummation. The twofold 
lot of “corruption” or “life eternal” is in every case 
no more, and no less, than the proper harvest of the 
kind of sowing practised here and now. The use made 


vi. 6-10.] SOWING AND REAPING. 41 


of our seed-time determines exactly, and with a moral 
certainty greater even than that which rules in the 
natural field, what kind of fruitage our immortality will 
render. 

This great axiom deserves to be lookedat in its broadest 
aspect. It involves the following considerations :— 

I. Our present life is the seed-time of an eternal harvest. 

Each recurring year presents a mirror of human 
existence. The analogy is a commonplace of the 
world's poetry. The spring is in every land a picture 
of youth—its morning freshness and innocence, its 
laughing sunshine, its opening blossoms, its bright 
and buoyant energy; and, alas, oftentimes its cold 
winds and nipping frosts and early, sudden blight! 
Summer images a vigorous manhood, with all the 


powers in action and the pulses of life beating at full 


swing ; when the dreams of youth are worked out in 
sober, waking earnest ; when manly strength is tested 
and matured under the heat of mid-day toil, and 
character is disciplined, and success or failure in life’s 
battle must be determined. Then follows mellow 
autumn, season of shortening days and slackening 
steps and gathering snows ; season too of ripe experi- 
ence, of chastened thought and feeling, of widened 
influence and clustering honours. And the story ends 
in the silence and winter of the grave! Ends? Nay, 
that is a new beginning! This whole round of earthly 
vicissitude is but a single spring-time. It is the mere 
childhood of man’s existence, the threshold of the vast 
house of life. 

The oldest and wisest man amongst us is only a 
little child in the reckoning of eternity. The Apostle 
Paul counted himself no more. ‘ We know in part,” 
he says; “we prophesy in part—talking, reasoning 


412 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


like children. We shall become men, seeing face to 
face, knowing as we are known” (1 Cor. xiii, 8, I1, 12). 
Do we not ourselves feel this in our higher moods ? 
There is an instinct of immortality, a forecasting of 
some ampler existence, “ a stirring of blind life” within 
the soul; there are visionary gleams of an unearthly 
Paradise haunting at times the busiest and most un- 
imaginative men. We are intelligences in the germ, 
lying folded up in the chrysalis stage of our existence. 
Eyes, wings are still to come. ‘It doth not yet appear 
what we shall be,” no more than he who had seen but 
the seed-sowing of early spring and the bare wintry 
furrows, could imagine what the golden, waving harvest 
would be like. There is a glorious, everlasting kingdom 
of heaven, a world which in its duration, its range of 
action and experience, its style of equipment and 
occupation, will be worthy of the elect children of God. 
Worship, music, the purest passages of human affection 
and of moral elevation, may give us some foretaste of 
its joys. But what it will be really like, “Eye hath 
not seen, nor ear heard; nor heart of man conceived.” 

Think of that, struggling heart, worn with labour, 
broken by sorrow, cramped and thwarted by the pres- 
sure of an unkindly world. ‘The earnest expectancy 
of the creation” waits for your revealing (Rem. viii. 
19). You will have your enfranchisement; your soul 
will take wing at last. Only have faith in God, and 
in righteousness ; only “be not weary in well-doing.” 
‘Those crippled powers will get their full play. Those 
baffled purposes and frustrated affections will unfold 
and blossom into a completeness undreamed of now, in 
the sunshine of heaven, in “the liberty of the glory of 
the sons of God.” Why look for your harvest here ! 
It is March, not August yet. “Jn due season we shall 


vi. 6-10] SOWING AND REAPING. 413 





reap, if we faint not.” See to it that you “sow to 
the Spirit,” that your life be of the true seed of the 
kingdom; and for the rest, have no care nor fear. 
What should we think of the farmer who in winter, 
when his fields were frost-bound, should go about 
wringing his hands and crying that his labour was all 
lost! Are we wiser in our despondent moods? How- 
ever dreary and unpromising, however poor and paltry 
in its outward seeming the earthly seed-time, your 
life’s work will have its resurrection. Heaven lies 
hidden in those daily acts of humble, difficult duty, 
even as the giant oak with its centuries of growth and 
all its summer glory sleeps in the acorn-cup. No eye 
may see it now; but “the Day will declare it!” 

II. In the second place, the quality of the future 
harvest depends entirely on the present sowing. 

In quantity, as we have seen, in outward state and 
circumstance, there is a complete contrast. The 
harvest surpasses the seed from which it sprang, by 
thirty, sixty or a hundred-fold. But in quality we find 
a strict agreement. In degree they may differ in- 
finitely ; in kind they are one. The harvest multiplies 
the effect of the sower’s labour; but it multiplies 
exactly that effect, and nothing else. This law runs 
through all life. If we could not count upon it, labour 
would be purposeless and useless; we should have to 
yield ourselves passively to nature’s caprice. The 
farmer sows wheat in his cornfield, the gardener plants 
and trains his fig-tree; and he gets wheat, or figs, for 
his reward—nothing else. Or is he a “sluggard” 
that “ will not plow by reason of the cold?” Does he 
let weeds and thistledown have the run of his garden- 
plot? Then it yields him a plentiful harvest of thistles 
and of weeds! What could he expect? ‘‘Mendo not 


414 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles.” From 
the highest to the lowest order of living things, each 
grows and fructifies “after its kind.” This is the rule 
of nature, the law which constituted Nature at the 
beginning. The good tree brings forth good fruit; 
and the good seed makes the good tree. 

All this has its moral counterpart. The law of re- 
production in kind holds equally true of the relation of 
this life to the next. Eternity for us will be the multi- 
plied, consummated outcome of the good or evil of the 
present life. Hell is just sin ripe—rotten ripe. Heaven - 
is the fruitage of righteousness. There will be two kinds 
of reaping, the Apostle tells us, because there are two 
different kinds of sowing. ‘ He that soweth to his flesh, 
shall of the flesh reap corruption:” there is nothing 
arbitrary or surprising in that. “ Corruption”—the 
moral decay and dissolution of the man’s being—is the 
natural retributive effect of his carnality. And “he 
that soweth to the Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life 
everlasting.” Here, too, the sequence is inevitable. 
Like breeds its like. Life springs of life; and death 
eternal is the culmination of the soul’s present death to 
God and goodness. The future glory of the saints is 
at once a Divine reward, and a necessary development 
of their present faithfulness. And eternal life lies 
germinally contained in faith’s earliest beginning, when 
it is but as “a grain of mustard seed.” We may 
expect in our final state the outcome of our present 
conduct, as certainly as the farmer who puts wheat into 
his furrows in November will count on getting wheat 
out of them again next August. 

Under this law of the harvest we are living at this 
moment, and sowing every day the seed of an immor- 
tality of honour or of shame. Life is the seed-plot of 


vi. 6-10.] SOWING AND REAPING. 415 


eternity ; and youth 1s above all the seed-time of life. 
What are our children doing with these precious, vernal 
years? What is going into their minds? What 
ideas, what desires are rooting themselves in these 
young souls ? If it be pure thoughts and true affections, 
love to God, self-denial, patience and humility, courage 
to do what is right-—if these be the things that are 
sown in their hearts, there will be for them, and for us, 
a glorious harvest of wisdom and love and honour in 
the years to come, and in the day of eternity. But if 
sloth and deceit be there, and unholy thoughts, vanity 
and envy and self-indulgence, theirs will be a bitter 
harvesting. Men talk of “sowing their wild oats,” as 
though that were an end of it; as though a wild and 
prodigal youth might none the less be followed by 
a sober manhood and an honoured old age. But it is 
not so. If wild oats have been sown, there will be 
wild oats to reap, as certainly as autumn follows 
spring. For every time the youth deceives parent 
or teacher, let him know that he will be deceived 
by the Father of lies a hundred times. For every 
impure thought or dishonourable word, shame will come 
upon him sixty-fold. If his mind be filled with trash 
and refuse, then trash and refuse are all it will be able 
to produce. If the good seed be not timely sown in 
his heart, thorns and nettles will sow themselves there 
fast enough ; and his soul will become like the sluggard’s 
garden, rank with base weeds and poison-plants, a place 
where all vile things will have their resort,—‘‘ rejected 
and nigh unto a curse.” : 
Who is “he that soweth to his own flesh?” It is, 
in a word, the se/fsh man. He makes his personal 
interest, and as a rule his bodily pleasure, directly or 
ultimately, the object of life. The sense of responsi- 


416 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS. 





bility to God, the thought of life as a stewardship of 
which one must give account, have no place in his 
mind, He isa “lover of pleasure rather than a lover 
of God.” His desires, unfixed on God, steadily tend 
downwards. Idolatry of self becomes slavery to the 
flesh. Every act of selfish pleasure-seeking, untouched 
by nobler aims, weakens and worsens the soul's life. 
The selfish man gravitates downward into the sensual 
man; the sensual man downward into the bottom- 
less pit. : 

This is the “ minding of the flesh” which “ is death” 
(Rom. viii. 5—8, 13). Forit is “enmity against God” 
and defiance of His law. It overthrows the course of 
nature, the balance of our human constitution ; it brings 
disease into the frame of our being. The flesh, unsub- 
dued and uncleansed by the virtue of the Spirit, breeds 
“corruption.” Its predominance is the sure presage of 
death. The process of decay begins already, this side 
the grave; and it is often made visible by appalling 
signs. The bloated face, the sensual leer, the restless, 
vicious eye, the sullen brow tell us what is going on 
within. The man’s soul is rotting in his body. Lust 
and greed are eating out of him the capacity for good. 
And if he passes on to the eternal harvest as he is, if 
that fatal corruption is not arrested, what doom can 
possibly await such a man but that of which our 
merciful Saviour spoke so plainly that we might 
tremble and escape—“ the worm that dieth not, and the 
fire that is not quenched !” 

III. And finally, God Himself is the Lord of the moral 
harvest. The rule of retribution, the nexus that binds 
together our sowing and our reaping, is not some- 
thing automatic and that comes about of itself; it is 
directed by the will of God, who “ worketh all in all,” 


vi. 6-10.] SOWING AND REAPING. 417 

Even in the natural harvest we look upwards to Him. 
The order and regularity of nature, the fair procession 
of the seasons waiting on the silent and majestic march 
of the heavens, have in all ages directed thinking and 
grateful men to the Supreme Giver, to the creative Mind 
and sustaining Will that sits above the worlds. As 
Paul reminded the untutored Lycaonians, “He hath 
not left Himself without witness, in that He gave us 
rains from heaven and fruitful seasons, filling our hearts 
with food and gladness.” It is “God” that “gives 
the increase” of the husbandman’s toil, of the merchant’s 
forethought, of the artist’s genius and skill. We do 
not sing our harvest songs, with our Pagan forefathers, 
to sun and rain and west wind, to mother Earth and 
the mystic powers of Nature. In these poetic idolatries 
were yet blended higher thoughts and a sense of Divine 
beneficence. But “to us there is one God, the Father, 
of whom are all things, and we for Him; and one Lord, 
Jesus Christ, through whom are all things, and we 
through Him.” In the harvest of the earth man is a 
worker together with God. The farmer does his part, 
fulfilling the conditions God has laid down in nature; 
“he putteth in the wheat in rows, and the barley in its 
appointed place ; for his God doth instruct him aright, 
and doth teach him.” He tills the ground, he sows 
the seed—and there he leaves it fo God. ‘He sleeps 
and rises night and day; and the seed springs and 
grows up, he knows not how.” And the wisest man or 
science cannot tell him how. ‘‘God giveth it a body, 
as it hath pleased Him.” But how—that is His own 
secret, which He seems likely to keep. All life in its 
growth, as in its inception, is a mystery, hid with Christ 
in God. Every seed sown in field or garden isa deposit 
committed to the faithfulness of God ; which He honours 


27 


418 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


by raising it up again, thirty, sixty, or a hundred-fold, 
in the increase of the harvest. 

In the moral world this Divine co-operation is the 
more immediate, as the field of action lies nearer, if one 
may so say, to the nature of God Himself. The earthly 
harvest may, and does often fail. Storms waste it; 
blights canker it; drought withers, or fire consumes it. 
Industry and skill, spent in years of patient labour, are 
doomed not unfrequently to see their reward snatched 
from them. The very abundance of other lands deprives 
our produce of its value. The natural creation “ was 
made subject to vanity.” Its frustration and disappoint- 
ment are over-ruled for higher ends. But in the 
spiritual sphere there are no casualties, no room for 
accident or failure. Here life comes directly into con- 
tact with the Living God, its fountain; and its laws 
partake of His absoluteness. 

Each act of faith, of worship, of duty and integrity, 
is a compact between the soul and God. We “ commit 
our souls in well-doing unto a faithful Creator” 
(1 Pet. iv. 19). By every such volition the heart is 
yielding itself to the direction of the Divine Spirit. It 
“‘sows unto the Spirit,” whenever in thought or deed 
His prompting is obeyed and His will made the law 
of life. And as in the soil, by the Divine chemistry 
of nature, the tiny germ is nursed and fostered out of 
sight, till it lifts itself from the sod a lovely flower, a 
perfect fruit, so in the order of grace it will prove 
that from the smallest seeds of goodness in human 
hearts, from the feeblest beginnings of the life of faith, 
from the lowliest acts of love and service, God in due 
season will raise up a glorious harvest for which heaven 
itself will be the richer, ' 


LHe EPILOGUE, 


CHAPTER VI. II—18. 





CHAPTER XXVIII. 
THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING. 


“See with how large letters I write unto you with mine own 
hand. As many as desire to make a fair show in the flesh, they 
compel you to be circumcised ; only that they may not be persecuted 
for the cross of Christ. For not even they who receive circumcision 
do themselves keep the law ; but they desire to have you circumcised, 
that they may glory in your flesh. But far be it from me to glory, 
save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world 
hath been crucified unto me, and I unto the world.”—-Gat vi. 11—14. 


HE rendering of ver. 11 in the Authorised Version 

is clearly erroneous (see how large a letter). 
Wickliff, guided by the Latin Vulgate—with what maner 
lettris—escaped this error. It is a plural term the 
Apostle uses, which occasionally in Greek writers 
denotes an epistle (as in Acts xxviii. 21), but nowhere 
else in Paul. Moreover the noun is in the dative (in- 
strumental) case, and cannot be made the object of 
the verb. 

Paul draws attention at this point to his penmanship, 
to the size of the letters he is using and their autogra- 
phic form. ‘‘See,” he says, “I write this in large 
characters, and under my own hand.” But does this 
remark apply to the whole Epistle, or to tts concluding 
paragraph from this verse onwards? To the latter 
only, as we think. The word “look” is a kind of nota 
bene. It marks something new, designed by its form 
and appearance in the manuscript to arrest the eye. 


re 


422 THE EPISTLE 10 THE GALATIANS. 


It was Paul’s practice to write through an amanuensis, 
adding with his own hand a few final words of greeting 
or blessing, by way of authentication.* Here this 
usage is varied. The Apostle wishes to give these 
closing sentences the utmost possible emphasis and 
solemnity. He would print them on the very heart 
and soul of his readers. This intention explains the 


language of ver. II ; and it is borne out by the contents — 


of the verses that follow. They are a postscript, or 
Epilogue, to the Epistle, rehearsing with incisive brevity 
the burden of all that it was in the Apostle’s heart to 
say to these troubled and shaken Galatians. 

The past tense of the verb (literally, J have written: 
’ €ypawa) is in accordance with Greek epistolary idiom. 
The writer associates himself with his readers. When 
the letter comes to them, Paul has written what they 
now peruse. On the assumption that the whole Epistle 
is autographic it is hard to see what object the large 
characters would serve, or why they should be referred 
to just at this point. 

Ver. II is in fact a sensational heading. The last 
paragraph of the Epistle is penned in larger type and 
in the Apostle’s characteristic hand, in order to fasten 
the attention of these impressionable Galatians upon 
his final deliverance. This device Paul employs but 
once. It is a kind of practice easily vulgarised and 
that loses its force by repetition, as in the case of 
“loud” printing and declamatory speech. 

In this emphatic finalé the interest of the Epistle, so 
powerfully sustained and carried through so many 
stages, is raised to a yet higher pitch. Its pregnant 

* See 2 Thess. iii. 17, 18; 1 Cor. xvi. 2I—23. In ver. 22 of the 


latter passage we can trace a similar autographic message, on a smaller 
scale. Comp. also Philemon 19. 


vi. 11-14.] 7HE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING. 423 


sentences give us—/first, another and still severer 
denunciation of ‘‘the troublers” (vv. 12, 13); secondly, 
a renewed protestation of the Apostle’s devotion to the 
cross of Christ (vv. 14, 15); ¢hirdly, a repetition in 
animated style of the practical doctrine of Christianity, 
and a blessing pronounced upon those who are faithful 
to it (vv. 15, 16). A pathetic reference to the writer’s 
personal sufferings, followed by the customary benedic- 
tion, brings the letter to a close. The first two topics 
of the Epilogue stand in immediate contrast with each 
other. 

I. The glorying of the Apostle's adversaries. ‘They 
would have you circumcised, that they may glory in 
your flesh” (ver. 12). 

This is the climax of his reproach against them. It 
gives us the key to their character. The boast measures 
the man. The aim of the Legalists was to get somany 
Gentiles circumcised, to win proselytes through Christ- 
ianity to Judaism. Every Christian brother persuaded 
to submit himself to this rite was another trophy for 
them. His circumcision, apart from any moral or 
spiritual considerations involved in the matter, was of 
itself enough to fill these proselytizers with joy. They 
counted up their ‘‘cases;” they rivalled each other in 
the competition for Jewish favour on this ground. To 
“slory in your flesh—to be able to point to your 
bodily condition as the proof of their influence and 
their devotion to the Law—this,” Paul says, “is the 
object for which they ply you with so many flatteries 
and sophistries.” 

Their aim was intrinsically low and unworthy. 
They “want to make a fair show (to present a good 
face) in the flesh.” Jesh in this place (ver. 12) recalls 
the contrast between Flesh and Spiit expounded in the 


424 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 








last chapter. Paul does not mean that the Judaizers 
wish to ‘‘make a good appearance 1” outward respects, 
in human opinion:” this would be little more than 
tautology. The expression stamps the Circumcisionists 
as “carnal” men. They are “not in the Spirit,” but 
“in the flesh;” and “after the flesh” they walk. It 
is on worldly principles that they seek to commend 
themselves, and to unspiritual men. What the Apostle 
says of himself in Phil. iii. 3, 4, illustrates by contrast 
his estimate of the Judaizers of Galatia: “ We are the 
circumcision, who worship by the Spirit of God, and 
glory in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the 
flesh.” We explains “ having confidence in the flesh” 
by enumerating his own advantages and distinctions 
as a Jew, the circumstances which commended him in 
the eyes of his fellow-countrymen—“ which were gain 
to me,” he says, ‘‘ but I counted them loss for Christ” 
(ver. 7). In that realm of fleshly motive and estimate 
which Paul had abandoned, his opponents still remained. 
They had exchanged Christian fidelity for worldly 
favour. And their religion took the colour of their 
moral disposition. To make a fair show, an imposing, 
plausible appearance in ceremonial and legal observance, 
\was the mark they set themselves. And they sought to 
draw the Church with them in this direction, and to 
impress upon it their own ritualistic type of piety. 

This was a worldly, and in their case a cowardly 
policy. ‘They constrain you to be circumcised, only 
that for the cross of Christ they may not suffer per- 
secution” (ver. 12). This they were determined by 
all means to avoid. Christ had sent His servants 
forth “as sheep in the midst of wolves.” The man 
that would serve Him, He said, must “ follow Him, 
taking up his cross.” But the Judaists thought they 


vi.11-14.] 7HE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORVING. 425 


knew better than this. They had a plan by which 
they could be the friends of Jesus Christ, and yet keep 
on good terms with the world that crucified Him. 
They would make their faith in Jesus a means for 
winning over proselytes to Judaism. If they succeeded 
in this design, their apostasy might be condoned. The 
circumcised Gentiles would propitiate the anger of their 
Israelite kindred, and would incline them to look more 
favourably upon the new doctrine These men, Paul 
says to the Galatians, are sacrificing you to their 
cowardice. They rob you of your liberties in Christ 
in order to make a shield for themselves against the 
enmity of their kinsmen. They pretend great zeal 
on your behalf; they are eager to introduce you into 
the blessings of the heirs of Abraham: the truth is, 
they are victims of a miserable fear of persecution. 
The cross of Christ, as the Apostle has repeatedly 
declared (comp. Chapters XII and XX1J), carried with 
it in Jewish eyes a flagrant reproach; and its accept- 
ance placed a gulf between the Christian and the 
orthodox Jew. The depth of that gulf became in- 
creasingly apparent the more widely the gospel spread, 
and the more radically its principles came to be ap- 
plied. To Paul it was now sorrowfully evident that 
the Jewish nation had rejected Christianity. They 
would not hear the Apostles of Jesus any more than 
the Master. For the preaching of the cross they had 
only loathing and contempt. Judaism recognised in 
the Church of the Crucified its most dangerous enemy, 
and was opening the fire of persecution against it all 
along the line. In this state of affairs, for a party of 
men to compromise and make private terms for them- 
selves with the enemies of Christ was_ treachery. 
They were surrendering, as this Epistle shows, all that 


426 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





was most vital to Christianity. They gave up the 
honour of the gospel, the rights of faith, the salvation 
of the world, rather than face the persecution in store 
for those ‘‘ who will live godly in Christ Jesus.” 

Not that they cared so much for the law in itself. 
Their glorying was imsincere, as well as selfish: “ For 
neither do the circumcised themselves keep the law. 
—These men who profess such enthusiasm for the law 
of Moses and insist so zealously on your submission to 
it, dishonour it by their own behaviour.” The Apostle 
is denouncing the same party throughout. Some in- 
terpreters make the first clause of ver. 13 a parenthesis, 
supposing that ‘“‘the circumcised” (participle present: 
those being circumcised) are Gentile perverts now being 
gained over to Judaism, while the foregoing and 
following sentences relate to the Jewish teachers. But 
the context does not intimate, nor indeed allow such a 
change of subject. It is “the circumcised” of ver. 13 @ 
who in ver. 13 & wish to see the Galatians circumcised, 
“in order to boast over their flesh,’—the same who, in 
ver. 12, “ desire to make a fair show in the flesh” and 
to escape Jewish persecution. Reading this in the 
light of the previous chapters, there seems to us no 
manner of doubt as to the persons thus designated. 
They are the Circumcisionists, Jewish Christians who 
sought to persuade the Pauline Gentile Churches to 
adopt circumcision and to receive their own legalistic 
perversion of the gospel of Christ. The present tense 
of the Greek participle, used as it is here with the 
definite article,* has the power of becoming a sudstan- 
tive, dropping its reference to time ; for the act denoted 








* ol mepireuwouevar (Revised Text). On this idiom, see Winer’s 
Grammar, p. 444; A. Buttmann’s V. 7. Grammar, p. 296. In ch, i, 
23, and in ii, 2 (7, doxofer), ve have had instances of this usage, 


. 


vi. 11-14.] THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING. 427 


passes into an abiding characteristic, so that the ex- 
pression acquires the form of a title. ‘The circum- 
cised” are the men of the circumcision, those known 
to the Galatians in this character. 

The phrase is susceptible, however, of a wider appli- 
cation. When Paul writes thus, he is thinking of 
others besides the handful of troublers in Galatia. In 
Rom. ii. 17—29 he levels this identical charge of hypo- 
critical law-breaking against the Jewish people at large: 
“Thou who gloriest in the law,” he exclaims, “ through 
thy transgression of the law dishonourest thou God ?” 
This shocking inconsistency, notorious in contemporary 
Judaism, was to be observed in the conduct of the 
legalist zealots in Galatia. They broke themselves the 
very law which they tried to force on others. Their 
pretended jealousy for the ordinances of Moses was 
itself their condemnation. It was not the glory of the 
law they were concerned about, but their own. 

The policy of the Judaizers was dishonourable both 
in spirit and in aim. They were false to Christ in 
whom they professed to believe ; and to the law which 
they pretended to keep. They were facing both ways, 
studying the safest, not the truest course, anxious in 
truth to be friends at once with the world and Christ. 
Their conduct has found many imitators, in men who 
“ make godliness a way of gain,” whose religious course 
is dictated by considerations of worldly self-interest. 
A little persecution, or social pressure, is enough to 
“turn them out of the way.” They cast off their 
Church obligations as they change their clothes, to 
suit the fashion. Business patronage, professional ad- 
vancement, a tempting family alliance, the entrée into 
some select and envied circle—such are the things for 
which creeds are bartered, for which men put their 


428 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





souls and the souls of their children knowingly in peril. 
Will it pay?—this is the question which comes in 
with a decisive weight in their estimate of matters of 
religious profession and the things pertaining to God. 
But “ what shall it profit ?” is the question of Christ. 

Nor are they less culpable who bring these motives 
into play, and put this kind of pressure on the weak 
and dependent. There are forms of social and 
pecuniary influence, bribes and threats quietly applied 
and well understood, which are hardly to be distinguished 
morally from persecution. Let wealthy and dominant 
Churches see to it that they be clear of these offences, 
that they make themselves the protectors, not the 
oppressors of spiritual liberty. The adherents that a 
Church secures by its worldly prestige do not in truth 
belong to the “kingdom that is not of this world.” 
Such successes are no triumphs of the cross. Christ 
repudiates them. The glorying that attends proselytism 
of this kind is, like that of Paul’s Judaistic adversaries, 
a “ glorying in the flesh.” 

II. ‘‘ But as for me,” cries the Apostle, “ far be it to 
glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ” (ver. 
14). Paul knows but one ground of exultation, one 
object of pride and confidence—/is Saviour’s cross. 

Before he had received his gospel and seen the cross 
in the light of revelation, like other Jews he regarded it 
with horror. Its existence covered the cause of Jesus 
with ignominy. It marked Him out as the object 
of Divine abhorrence. To the Judaistic Christian the 
cross was still an embarrassment. He was secretly 
ashamed of a crucified Messiah, anxious by some means 
to excuse the scandal and make amends for it in the 
face of Jewish public opinion. But now this disgraceful 
cross in the Apostle’s eyes is the most glorious thing 


vi, 11-14.] THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING, 429 








in the universe. Its message is the good news of God 
to all mankind. It is the centre of faith and religion, 
of all that man knows of God or can receive from Him. 
Let it be removed, and the entire structure of revela- 
tion falls to pieces, like an arch without its keystone. 
The shame of the cross was turned into honour and 
majesty. Its foolishness and weakness proved to be 
the wisdom and the power of God. Out of the gloom 
in which Calvary was shrouded there now shone forth 
the clearest light of holiness and love. 

Paul gloried in the cross of Christ because it mani- 
fested to him ¢he character of God. The Divine love 
and righteousness, the entire range of those moral 
excellences which in their sovereign perfection belong 
to the holiness of God, were there displayed with a 
vividness and splendour hitherto inconceivable. ‘God 
so loved the world,” and yet so honoured the law of 
right, that ‘‘ He spared not His own Son, but delivered 
Him up for us all.” How stupendous is this sacrifice, 
which baffles the mind and overwhelms the heart! 
Nowhere in the works of creation, nor in any other 
dispensation of justice or mercy touching human affairs, 
is there a spectacle that appeals to us with an effect to 
be compared with that of the Sufferer of Calvary. 

Let me look, let me think again. Who is He that 
bleeds on that tree of shame? Why does the Holy 
One of God submit to these indignities ? Why those 
cruel wounds, those heart-breaking cries that speak of 
a soul pierced by sorrows deeper than all that bodily 
anguish can inflict ? Has the Almighty indeed forsaken 
Him? Has the Evil One sealed his triumph in the 
blood of the Son of God? Is it God’s mercy to the 
world, or is it not rather Satan’s hate and man’s utter 
wickedness that stand here revealed? The issue 


430 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





shows with whom victory lay in the dread conflict 
fought out in the Redeemer’s soul and flesh. “ God 
was in Christ’—living, dying, rising. And what 
was He doing in Christ?—“reconciling the world unto 
Himself.” 

Now we know what the Maker of the worlds is like 
“He that hath seen Me,” said Jesus on Passion Eve, 
“hath seen the Father. From henceforth ye know 
Him, and have seen Him.” What the world knew 
before of the Divine character and intentions towards 
man was but “poor, weak rudiments.” Now the 
believer has come to Pentel, like Jacob, he has “seen 
the face of God.” He has touched the centre of things. 
He has found the secret of love. 

Moreover, the Apostle gloried in the cross because 
it was the salvation of men. His love for men made 
him boast of it, no less than his zeal for God. The 
gospel burning in his heart and on his lips, was “ God’s 
power unto salvation, both to Jew and Greek.” He 
says this not by way of speculation or theological 
inference, but as the testimony of his constant expe- 
rience. It was bringing men by thousands from 
darkness into light, raising them from the slough of 
hideous vices and guilty despair, taming the fiercest 
passions, breaking the strongest chains of evil, driving 
out of human hearts the demons of lust and hate. 
This message, wherever it went, was saving men, as 
nothing had done before, as nothing else has done 
since. What lover of his kind would not rejoice in this? 

We are members of a weak and suffering race, 
groaning each in his own fashion under “the law of 
sin and death,” crying out ever and anon with Paul, 
“© wretched man that I am!” If the misery of our 
bondage was acute its darkness extreme, how great 


7 aint 


vi. 11-14.) THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING. 431 


is the joy with which we hail our Redeemer! It is the 
gladness of an immense relief, the joy of salvation. 
And our triumph is redoubled when we perceive that 
His grace brings us not deliverance for ourselves alone, 
but commissions us to impart it to our fellow-men. 
“Thanks be to God,” cries the Apostle, ‘who always 
leadeth us in triumph, and maketh known the savour 
of His knowledge by us in every place” (2 Cor. ii. 14). 

The essence of the gospel revealed to Paul, as we 
have observed more than once, lay in its conception 
of the office of the cross of Christ. Not the Incarnation 
—the basis of the manifestation of the Father in the 
Son ; not the sinless life and superhuman teaching of 
Jesus, which have moulded the spiritual ideal of faith 
and supplied its contents; not the Resurrection and 
Ascension of the Redeemer, crowning the Divine edifice 
with the glory of life eternal; but the sacrifice of the 
cross is the focus of the Christian revelation. This 
gives to the gospel its savimg virtue. Round this 
centre all other acts and offices of the Saviour revolve, 
and from it receive their healing grace. From the 
hour of the Fall of man the manifestations of the 
Divine grace to him ever looked forward to Calvary ; 
and to Calvary the testimony of that grace has looked 
backward ever since. “ By this sign” the Church has 
conquered; the innumerable benefits with which her 
teaching has enriched mankind must all be laid in 
tribute at the foot of the cross. 

The atonement of Jesus Christ demands from us a 
faith like Paul’s, a faith of exultation, a boundless en- 
thusiasm of gratitude and confidence. If it is worth 
believing in at all, it is worth believing in heroically. 
Let us so boast of it, so exhibit in our lives its power, 
so spend ourselves in serving it, that we may justly 


432 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





claim from all men homage toward the Crucified. Let 
us lift up the cross of Christ till its glory shines world- 
wide, till, as He said, it ‘‘draws all men unto Him.” 
If we triumph in the cross, we shall triumph by it. It 
will carry the Church to victory. 

And the cross of Jesus Christ is the salvation of 
men, just because it is the revelation of God. It is 
“life eternal,” said Jesus to the Father, “ to know Thee.” 
The gospel does not save by mere pathos, but by 
knowledge—by bringing about a right understanding 
between man and his Maker, a reconciliation. It brings 
God and man together in the light of truth. In this 
revelation we see Him, the Judge and the Father, the 
Lord of the conscience and the Lover of His children ; 
and we see ourse/ves—what our sins mean, what they 
have done. God is face to face with the world. Holi- 
ness and sin meet in the shock of Calvary, and flash 
into light, each illuminated by contrast with the other. 
And the view of what God is in Christ—how He judges, 
how He pities us—once fairly seen, breaks the heart, 
kills the love of sin. “The glory of God in the face 
of Jesus Christ,” sitting on that thorn-crowned brow, 
clothing that bleeding Form rent with the anguish of 
Mercy’s conflict with Righteousness on our behalf—it 
is this which ‘‘shines in our hearts” as in Paul's, and 
cleanses the soul by its pity and its terror. But this 
is no dramatic scene, it is Divine, eternal fact. “We 
have beheld and do testify that the Father sent the Son 
to be the Saviour of the world. We snow and have 
believed the love that God hath to us” (1 Johniv. 14, 16). 

Such is the relation to God which the cross has 
established for the Apostle. In what position does it 
place him toward ¢he world? To it, he tells us, he has 
bidden farewell. Paul and the world are dead to each 


vi. I1-14.] THE FALSE AND THE TRUE GLORYING. 433 


other. The cross stands between them. In ch. ii. 20 
he had said, “ Z am crucified with Christ ;” in ch. v. 
24, that his “flesh with its passions and lusts” had 
undergone this fate; and now he writes, “ Through 
the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ the world is 
crucified to me, and I to the world.” 

Literally, @ world—a whole world was crucified for 
Paul when his Lord died upon the cross. The world 
that slew Him put an end to itself, so far as he is 
concerned. He can never believe in it, never take 
pride in it, nor do homage to it any more. It is 
stripped of its glory, robbed of its power to charm or 
govern him. The death of shame that old “ evil world” 
inflicted upon Jesus has, in Paul’s eyes, reverted to 
itself ; while for the Saviour it is changed into a life 
of heavenly glory and dominion. The Apostle’s life 
is withdrawn from it, to be “hid with Christ in God.” 

This “crucifixion” is therefore mutual. The Apostle 
also “is crucified to the world.” Saul the Pharisee 
was a reputable, religious man of the world, recognised 
by it, alive to it, taking his place in its affairs. But 
that “old man” has been “crucified with Christ.” 
The present Paul is in the world’s regard another 
person altogether—“ the filth of the world, the off- 
scouring of all things,” no better than his crucified 
Master and worthy to share His punishment. He is 
dead—“ crucified” to it. Faith in Jesus Christ placed 
a gulf, wide as that which parts the dead and living, 
between the Church of the Apostles and men around 
them. The cross parted two worlds wholly different. 
He who would go back into that other world, the world 
of godless self-pleasing and fleshly idolatry, must step 
over the cross of Christ to do it. 

“To me,” testifies Paul, “the world is crucified.” 

28 


434 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





And the Church of Christ has still to witness this 
confession. We read in it a prophecy. Evil must die. 
The world that crucified the Son of God, has written 
its own doom. With its Satanic Prince it “has been 
jucged” (John xii. 31; xvi. 11). Morally, it is dead 
already. The sentence has passed the Judge’s lips. 
The weakest child of God may safely defy it, and scorn 
its boasting. Its visible force is still immense; its 
subjects multitudinous ; its empire to appearance hardly 
shaken. It towers like Goliath confronting “the armies 
of the living God.” But the foundation of its strength 
is gone. Decay saps its frame. Despair creeps over 
its heart.. The consciousness of its impotence and 
misery grows upon it. 

Worldliness has lost its old serenity irrecoverably. 
The cross incessantly disturbs it, and haunts its very 
dreams. Antichristian thought at the present time 
is one wide fever of discontent. It is sinking into 
the vortex of pessimism. Its mockery is louder and 
more brilliant than ever; but there is something 
strangely convulsive in it all; it is the laughter of 
despair, the dance of death. 

Christ the Son of God -/as come down from the 
cross, as they challenged Him. But coming down, He 
has fastened there in His place the world that taunted 
Him. Struggle as it may, it cannot unloose itself from 
its condemnation, from the fact that it has killed its 
Prince of Life. The cross of Jesus Christ must save— 
or destroy. The world must be reconciled to God, or 
it will perish. On the foundation laid of God in Zion 
men will either build or break themselves for ever. 
The world that hated Christ and the Father, the world 
that Paul cast from him as a dead thing, cannot endure. 
It “‘ passeth away, and the lust thereof.” 


CHAPTER XXIX. 


RITUAL NOTHING: CHARACTER EVERYTHING. 


“For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but 
a new creation. And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace de 
upon them, and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.”—GaL. vi. 15, 16. 


ERSE 14 comprehends the whole theology of the 

Epistle, and ver. 15 brings to a head its practical 
and ethical teaching. This apophthegm is one of the 
landmarks of religious history. It ranks in importance 
with Christ’s great saying: “God is a Spirit; and they 
that worship Him, must worship in spirit and truth” 
(John iv. 21I—24). These sentences of Jesus and of 
Paul taken together mark the dividing line between the 
Old and the New Economy. They declare the nature of 
the absolute religion, from the Divine and human side 
respectively. God’s pure spiritual being is affirmed 
by Jesus Christ to be henceforth the norm of religious 
worship. The exclusive sacredness of Jerusalem, or 
of Gerizim, had therefore passed away. On the other 
hand, and regarding religion from its psychological 
side, as matter of experience and attainment, it is set 
forth by our Apostle as an inward life, a spiritual con- 
dition, dependent on no outward form or performance 
whatsoever. Paul’s principle is a consequence of that 
declared by his Master. If “God is a Spirit,” to be 
known and approached as such, ceremonial at once 
loses its predominance; it sinks into the accidental 


436 THE EPISTLE 70 THE GALATIANS. 


the merely provisional and perishing element of 
religion. Faith is no longer bound to material con- 
ditions; it passes inward to its proper seat in the 
spirit of man. And the dictum that “ Circumcision is 
nothing, and uncircumcision nothing” (comp. ch. v. 6; 
I Cor. vii. 19), becomes a watchword of Christian 
theology. 

This Pauline axiom is advanced to justify the con- 
fession of the Apostle made in ver. 14; it supports the 
protest of vv. 12—14 against the devotees of circum- 
cision, who professed faith in Christ but were ashamed 
of His cross. ‘That Judaic rite in which you glory,” 
he says, “is nothing. Ritual qualifications and dis- 
qualifications are abolished. Life in the Spirit, the 
new creation that begins with faith in Christ crucified 
—that is everything.” The boasts of the Judaizers 
were therefore folly : they rested on “nothing.” The 
Apostle’s glorying alone was valid: the new world of 
“the kingdom of God,” with its “righteousness and 
peace and joy in the Holy Ghost,” was there to 
justify it. 

I. For neither ts circumcision anything.—Judaism is 
abolished at a stroke! With it circumcision was 
everything. “The circumcision” and “the people of 
God” were in Israelitish phrase terms synonymous. 
“Uncircumcision” embraced all that was heathenish, 
outcast and unclean. 

The Mosaic polity made the status of its subjects, 
their relation to the Divine covenant, to depend on this 
initiatory rite. ‘‘Circumcised the eighth day,” the 
child came under the rule and guardianship of the 
sacred Law. In virtue of this mark stamped upon his 
body, he was ipso facto a member of the congregation 
of the Lord, bound to all its duties, so far as his age 


vi. 15, 16.] RITUAL NOTHING. 437 


permitted, and partner in all its privileges. The con- 
stitution of Mosaism—its ordinances of worship, its 
ethical discipline, its methods of administration, and 
the type of character which it formed in the Jewish 
nation—rested on this fundamental sacrament, and took 
their complexion therefrom. 

The Judaists necessarily therefore made it their first 
object to enforce circumcision. If they secured this, 
they could carry everything ; and the complete Judaizing 
of Gentile Christianity was only a question of time. 
This foundation laid, the entire system of legal obliga- 
tion could be reared upon it (ch. v. 3). To resist 
the imposition of this yoke was for the Pauline 
Churches a matter of life and death. They could not 
afford to “yield by subjection—no, not for an hour.” 
The Apostle stands forth as the champion of their 
freedom, and casts all Jewish pretensions to the 
winds when he says, “Neither is circumcision any- 
thing.” 

This absolute way of putting the matter must have 
provoked the orthodox Jew to the last degree. The 
privileges and ancestral glories of his birth, the truth 
of God in His covenants and revelations to the fathers, 
were to his mind wrapped up in this ordinance, and 
belonged of right to “the Circumcision.” To say that 
circumcision is nothing seemed to him as good as 
saying that the Law and the Prophets were nothing, 
that Israel had no pre-eminence over the Gentiles, no 
right to claim “the God of Abraham” as her God. 
Hence the bitterness with which the Apostle was per- 
secuted by his fellow-countrymen, and the credence 
given, even by orthodox Jewish Christians, to the 
charge that he “taught to the Jews apostasy from 
Moses” (Acts xxi. 21). In truth Paul did nothing ot 


438 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS, 





the kind, as James of Jerusalem very well knew. But 
a sentence like this, torn from its context, and repeated 
amongst Jewish communities, naturally gave rise to 
such imputations. 

In his subsequent Epistle to the Romans the Apostle 
is at pains to correct erroneous inferences drawn from 
this and similar sayings of his concerning the Law. 
He shows that circumcision, in its historical import, 
was of the highest value. ‘What is the advantage of 
the Jew? What the benefit of circumcision? Much 
every way,” he acknowledges. “Chiefly in that to 
them were entrusted the oracles of God” (Rom. iii. 1, 
2). And again: ‘‘Who are Israelites; whose is the 
adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the 
lawgiving, and the service of God, and the promises ; 
whose are the fathers,—and of whom is the Christ as 
concerning the flesh, who is over all, God blessed for 
ever” (Rom. ix. 4, 5). Eloquently has Paul vindicated 
himself from the reproach of indifference to the ancient 
faith, Never did he love his Jewish kindred more 
fervently, nor entertain a stronger confidence in their 
Divine calling, than at the moment when in that 
Epistle he pronounced the reprobation that ensued on 
their rejecting the gospel of Christ. He repeats in 
the fullest terms the claim which Jesus Himself was 
careful to assert, in declaring the extinction of Judaism 
as a local and tribal religion, that “ Salvation is of the 
Jews” (John iv. 21—24). In the Divine order of 
history it is still “to the Jew first.” But natural 
relationship to the stock of Abraham has in itself no 
spiritual virtue ; ‘circumcision of the flesh” is worth- 
less, except as the symbol of a cleansed and consecrated 
heart. The possession of this outward token of God’s 
covenant with Israel, and the hereditary blessings it 


vi. 15, 16.] RITUAL NOTHING. 439 


conferred, brought with them a higher responsibility, 
involving heavier punishment in case of unfaithfulness 
(Rom. ii. 17—iii. 8). This teaching is pertinent to 
the case of children of Christian families, to those 
formally attached to the Church by their baptism in 
infancy and by attendance on her public rites. These 
things certainly have ‘“much advantage every way.” 
And yet in themselves, without a corresponding inner 
regeneration, without a true death unto sin and life 
unto righteousness, these also are nothing. The 
limiting phrase “in Christ Jesus” is no doubt a 
copyist’s addition to the text, supplied from ch. v. 6; 
but the qualification is in the Apostle’s mind, and is 
virtually given by the context. No ceremony is of the 
essence of Christianity. No outward rite by itself 
makes a Christian. We are “joined to the Lord” in 
“one Spirit.” This is the vital tie. 

Nor ts uncircumcision anything. This is the counter- 
balancing assertion, and it makes still clearer the bear- 
ing of the former saying. Paul is not contending 
against Judaism in any anti-Judaic spirit. He is not 
for setting up Gentile in the place of Jewish customs 
in the Church ; he excludes both impartially. Neither, 
he declares, have any place “in Christ Jesus,” and 
amongst the things that accompany salvation. Paul 
has no desire to humiliate the Jewish section of the 
Church; but only to protect the Gentiles from its 
aggressions. He lays his hand on both parties and by 
this evenly balanced declaration restrains each of them 
from encroaching on the other. ‘ Was any one called 
circumcised” ? he writes to Corinth: “let him not 
renounce his circumcision. Hath any one been called 
in uncircumcision ? Let him not be circumcised.” The 
two states alike are “nothing” from the Christian 


440 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





standpoint. The essential thing is “ keeping the com- 
mandments of God” (1 Cor. vii. 18, 19). 

Christian Gentiles retained in some instances, doubt- 
less, their former antipathy to Jewish practices. And 
while many of the Galatians were inclined to Legalism, 
others cherished an extreme repugnance to its usages. 
The pretensions of the Legalists were calculated to 
excite in the minds of enlightened Gentile believers a 
feeling of contempt, which led them to retort on Jewish 
pride with language of ridicule. Anti-Judaists would 
be found arguing that circumcision was a degradation, 
the brand of a servile condition ; and that its possessor 
must not presume to rank with the free sons of God. 
In their opinion, uncircumcision was to be preferred 
and had “much advantage every way.” Amongst 
Paul’s immediate followers there may have been some 
who, like Marcion in the second century, would fain be 
more Pauline than the Apostle himself, and replied to 
Jewish intolerance with an anti-legal intolerance of 
their own. To this party it was needful to say, “Neither 
is uncircumcision anything.” 

The pagan in his turn has nothing for which to 
boast over the man of Israel. This is the caution which 
the Apostle urges on his Gentile readers so earnestly 
in Rom. xi. 13—24. He reminds them that they owe 
an immense debt of gratitude to the ancient people of 
God. Wild branches grafted into the stock of Abraham, 
they were ‘‘ partaking of the root and fatness” of the 
old “olive-tree.” If the “natural branches” had been 
“ broken off through unbelief,” much more might they 
It became them ‘not to be high-minded but to fear.” 
So Paul seeks to protect Israel after the flesh, in 
its rejection and sorrowful exile from the fold of Christ, 
against Gentile insolence. Alas! that his protection has 


! 


vi. 15, 16.] RITUAL NOTHING. 441 


been so little availing. The Christian persecutions of 
the Jews are a dark blot on the Church’s record. 

The enemies of bigotry and narrowness too often 
imbibe the same spirit. When others treat us with 
contempt, we are apt to pay them back in their own 
coin. They unchurch us, because we cannot pronounce 
their shibboleths ; they refuse to see in our communion 
the signs of Christ’s indwelling. It requires our best 
charity in that case to appreciate their excellencies and 
the fruit of the Spirit manifest in them. “I am of 
Cephas,” say they ; and we answer with the challenge, 
“T of Paul.” Sectarianism is denounced in a sectarian 
spirit. The enemies of form and ceremony make a 
religion of their Anti-ritualism. Church controversies 
are proverbially bitter; the love which “‘hopeth and 
believeth all things,” under their influence suffers a 
sad eclipse. On both sides let us be on our guard. 
The spirit of partisanship is not confined to the 
assertors of Church prerogative. An obstinate and 
uncharitable pride has been known to spring up in the 
breasts of the defenders of liberty, in those who deem 
themselves the exponents of pure spiritual religion. 
“Thus I trample on the pride of Plato,” said the Cynic, 
as he trod on the philosopher’s sumptuous carpets; and 
Plato justly retorted, “‘ You do it with greater pride.” 

The Apostle would fain lift his readers above the 
level of this legalist contention. He bids them dismiss 
their profitless debates respecting the import of circum- 
cision, the observance of Jewish feasts and sabbaths. 
These debates were a mischief in themselves, destroying 
the Church’s peace and distracting men’s minds from 
the spiritual aims of the Gospel ; they were fatal to the 
dignity and elevation of the Christian life. When men 
allow themselves to be absorbed by questions of this 


442 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


kind, and become Circumcisionist or Uncircumcisionist 
partisans, eager Ritualists or Anti-ritualists, they lose 
the sense of proportion in matters of faith and the poise 
of a conscientious and charitable judgement. These 
controversies pre-eminently ‘‘minister questions” to no 
profit but to the subverting of the hearers, instead of 
furthering “ the dispensation of God, which is in faith” 
(1 Tim. i. 4). They disturb the City of God with intes- 
tine strife, while the enemy thunders at the gates. 
Could we only let such disputes alone, and leave them 
to perish by inanition! So Paul would have the 
Galatians do; he tells them that the great Mosaic rite 
is no longer worth defending or attacking. The best 
thing is to forget it, 

II. What then has the Apostle to put in the place of 
ritual, as the matter of cardinal importance and chief 
study in the Church of Christ? He presents to view 
a new creation. 

It is something mew that he desiderates. Mosaism 
was effete. The questions arising out of it were dying, 
or dead. The old method of revelation which dealt 
with Jew and Gentile as different religious species, and 
conserved Divine truth by a process of exclusion and 
prohibition, had served its purpose. ‘The middle wall 
of partition was broken down.” The age of faith 
and freedom had come, the dispensation of grace and of 
the Spirit. The Legalists minimised, they practically 
ignored the significance of Calvary. Race-distinctions 
and caste-privileges were out of keeping with such a 
religion as Christianity. The new creed set up a new 
order of life, which left behind it the discussions of 
rabbinism and the formularies of the legal schools as 
survivals of bygone centuries. 

The novelty of the religion of the gospel was most 


vi. 15, 16.) CHARACTER EVERYTHING. 443 


conspicuous in the new type of character that it created. 
The faith of the cross claims to have produced not a 
new style of ritual, a new system of government, but 
new men. By this product it must be judged. The 
Christian is the ‘“‘new creature” which it begets. 

Whatever Christianity has accomplished in the outer 
world—the various forms of worship and social life 
in which it is embodied, the changed order of thought 
and of civilisation which it is building up—is the 
result of its influence over the hearts of individual men. 
Christ, above all other teachers, addressed Himself 
directly to the heart, whence proceed the issues of life. 
There His gospel establishes its seat. The Christian is 
the man with a “ new heart.” The prophets of the Old 
Testament looked forward to this as the essential bless- 
ing of religion, promised for the Messianic times (Heb. 
villi. 8—13). Through them the Holy Spirit uttered 
His protest against the mechanical legalism to which 
the religion of the temple and the priesthood was 
already tending. But this witness had fallen on deaf 
ears ; and when Christ proclaimed, “It is the Spirit 
that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing,’ when He 
said, ‘The things that defile a man come out of his 
heart,” He preached revolutionary doctrine. It is the 
same principle that the Apostle vindicates. The 
religion of Christ has to do in the first place with the 
individual man, and in man with his heart. 

What then, we further ask, is the character of this 
hidden man of the heart, ‘created anew in Christ 
Jesus”? Our Epistle has given us the answer. In 
him “ faith working by love” takes the place of circum- 
cision and uncircumcision—that is, of Jewish and 
Gentile ceremonies and moralities, powerless alike to 
save (ch. v. 6). Love comes forward to guarantee the 


\ 


444 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


“ fulfilling of the law,” whose fulfilment legal sanctions 
failed to secure (ch. v. 14). And the Spirit of Christ 
assumes His sovereignty in this work of new creation, 
calling into being His array of inward graces to 
supersede the works of the condemned flesh that no 
longer rules in the nature of God’s redeemed sons 
(ch. v. 16—24). 

The Legalists, notwithstanding their idolatry of the 
law, did not keep it. So the Apostle has said, without 
fear of contradiction (ver. 13). But the men of the Spirit, 
actuated by a power above law, in point of fact do keep 
it, and “law’s righteousness is fulfilled” in them (Rom. 
viii. 3, 4). This was a new thing in the earth. Never 
had the law of God been so fulfilled, in its essentials, as 
it was by the Church of the Crucified. Here were men 
who truly “loved God with all their soul and strength, 
and their neighbour as themselves.” From Love the 
highest down to Temperance the humblest, all “the 
fruit of the Spirit” in its clustered perfection flourished 
in their lives. Jewish discipline and Pagan culture 
were both put to shame by this “new creation” of 
moral virtue. These graces were produced not in 
select instances of individuals favoured by nature, in 
souls disposed to goodness, or after generations of 
Christian discipline ; but in multitudes of men of every 
grade of life—Jews and Greeks, slaves and freemen, 
wise and unwise—in those who had been steeped in 
infamous vices, but were now “ washed, sanctified, 
justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the 
Spirit of our God.” 

Such regenerated men were the credentials of Paul's 
gospel. As he looked on his Corinthian converts, 
drawn out of the very sink of heathen corruption, he 
could say, “The seal of my apostleship are ye in the 


vi. 15, 16.] CHARACTER EVERYTHING. 445 


Lord.” The like answer Christianity has still to give 
to its questioners. If it ever ceases to render this 
answer, its day is over; and all the strength of its 
historical and philosophical evidences will not avail it. 
The Gospel is “God’s power unto salvation”—or it 
is nothing ! 

Such is Paul’s canon, as he calls it in ver. 16—the 
rule which applies to the faith and practice of every 
Christian man, to the pretensions of all theological and 
ecclesiastical systems. The true Christianity, the true 
churchmanship, is that which turns bad men into good, 
which transforms the slaves of sin into sons of God. 
A true faith is a saving faith. The “ new creation” is 
the sign of the Creator’s presence. It is God “who 
quickeneth the dead” (Rom. iv. 17). 

When the Apostle exalts character at the expense 
of ceremonial, he does this in a spirit the very opposite 
of religious indifference. His maxim is far removed 
from that expressed in the famous couplet of Pope: 


“For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight ; 
His can’t be wrong whose life is in the right.” 


The gospel of Christ is above all things a mode of 
faith. The “new creature” is a son of God, seeking 
to be like God. His conception of the Divine cha- 
racter and of his own relationship thereto governs his 
whole life. His “life is in the right,” because his 
heart is right with God. All attempts to divorce 
morality from religion, to build up society on a secular 
and non-religious basis, are indeed foredoomed to 
failure. The experience of mankind is against them. 
As a nation’s religion has been, so its morals. The 
ethical standard in its rise or fall, if at some interval 
of time, yet invariably, follows the advance or decline 


446 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


of spiritual faith. For practical purposes, and for 
society at large, religion supplies the mainspring of 
ethics. Creed is in the long run the determinant of 
character. The question with the Apostle is not in the 
least whether religion is vital to morals; but whether 
this or that formality is vitai to religion. 


One cannot help wondering how Paul would have 
applied his canon to the Church questions of our own 
day. Would he perchance have said, “ Episcopacy is 
nothing, and Presbyterianism is nothing ;—but keeping 
the commandments of God”? Or might he have 
interposed in another direction, to testify that “ Church 
Establishments are nothing, and Disestablishment is 
nothing ; charity is the one thing needful?” Nay, 
can we even be bold enough to imagine the Apostle 
declaring, ‘ Neither Baptism availeth anything, nor 
the Lord's Supper availeth anything,—apart from the 
faith that works by love”? His rule at any rate 
conveys an admonition to us when we magnify ques- 
tions of Church ordinance and push them to the front, 
at the cost of the weightier matters of our common 
faith. Are there not multitudes of Romanists on the 
one hand who have, as we believe, perverted sacra- 
ments, and Quakers on the other hand who have no 
sacraments, but who have, nothwithstanding, a penitent, 
humble, loving faith in Jesus Christ ? And their faith 
saves them: who will doubt it? Although faith must 
ordinarily suffer, and does in our judgement manifestly 
suffer, when deprived of these appointed and most 
precious means of its expression and nourishment. 
But what authority have we to forbid to such believers 
a place in the Body of Christ, in the brotherhood of 
redeemed souls, and to refuse them the right hand of 


vi. 15, 16.] CHARACTER EVERYTHING. 447 


fellowship, “ who have received the Holy Ghost as 
wellas we”? “It is the Spirit that beareth witness:” 
who is he that gainsayeth ? Grace is more than the 
means of grace. 


“And as many as shall walk by this rule, peace be 
on them and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.” 
Here is an Apostolic benediction for every loyal 
Church. The “walk” that the Apostle approves is the 
measured, even pace, the steady march* of the redeemed 
host of Israel. On all who are thus minded, who are 
prepared to make spiritual perfection the goal of their 
endeavours for themselves and for the Church, Paul 
invokes God’s peace and mercy. 

Peace is followed by the mercy which guards and 
restores it. Mercy heals backslidings and multiplies 
pardons. She loves to bind up a broken heart, or a 
rent and distracted Church. Like the pillar of fire and 
cloud in the wilderness, this twofold blessing rests day 
and night upon the tents of Israel. Through all their 
pilgrimage it attends the children of Abraham, who 
follow in the steps of their father’s faith. 

With this tender supplication Paul brings his warn- 
ings and dissuasives to an end. For the betrayers- 
of the cross he has stern indignation and alarms of 
judgement. Towards his children in the faith nothing 
but peace and mercy remains in his heart. As an 
evening calm shuts in a tempestuous day, so this 
blessing concludes the Epistle so full of strife and 
agitation. We catch in it once more the chime of 
the old benediction, which through all storm and peril 
ever rings in ears attuned to its note: Peace shall be 
upon Israel (Ps. cxxv. 5). 





*® Lroxjoovow: comp. ch, v. 25. 


CHAPTER XXX. 


THE BRAND OF JESUS. 


“From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear branded on 
my body the marks of Jesus: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be 
with your spirit, brethren, Amen,.”—GAL, vi. 17, 18. 


HE Apostle’s pen lingers over the last words 

of this Epistle. His historical self-defence, his 
theological argument, his practical admonitions, with 
the blended strain of expostulation and entreaty that 
runs through the whole—now rising into an awful 
severity, now sinking into mother-like tenderness— 
have reached their conclusion. The stream of deep 
and fervent thought pouring itself out in these pages 
has spent its force. This prince of the Apostles in 
word and doctrine has left the Church no more powerful 
or characteristic utterance of his mind. And Paul has 
marked the special urgency of his purpose by his closing 
message contained in the last six verses, an Epistle 
within the Epistle, penned in large, bold strokes from 
his own hand, in which his very soul transcribes itself 
before our eyes. 

It only remains for him to append his signature. 
We should expect him to do this in some striking and 
special way. His first sentence (ch. i. I—10) revealed 
the profound excitement of spirit under which he is 
labouring ; not otherwise does he conclude, Ver. 17 


vi. 17, 18.] THE BRAND OF JESUS. 449 








sharply contrasts with the words of peace that hushed 
our thoughts at the close of the last paragraph. 
Perhaps the peace he wishes these troubled Churches 
reminds him of his own troubles. Or is it that in 
breathing his devout wishes for ‘the Israel of God,” 
he cannot but think of those who were “of Israel,” but 
no sons of peace, in whose hearts was hatred and 
mischief toward himself? Some such thought stirs 
anew the grief with which he has been shaken; anda 
pathetic cry breaks from him like the sough of the 
departing tempest. 

Yet the words have the sound of triumph more than 
of sorrow. Paul stands a conscious victor, though 
wounded and with scars upon him that he will carry 
to his grave. Whether this letter will serve its imme- 
diate purpose, whether the defection in Galatia will be 
stayed by it, or not, the cause of the cross is sure of its 
triumph; his contention against its enemies has not 
been in vain. The force of inspiration that uplifted 
him in writing the Epistle, the sense of insight and 
authority that pervades it, are themselves an earnest of 
victory. The vindication of his authority in Corinth, 
which, as we read the order of events, had very recently 
occurred, gave token that his hold on the obedience of 
the Gentile Churches was not likely to be destroyed, 
and that in the conflict with legalism the gospel of 
liberty was certain to prevail. His courage rises with 
the danger. He writes as though he could already 
say, “I have fought the good fight. Thanks be to 
God, which always leadeth us in triumph” (2 Tim. iv. 
gav2 Cor-lis 14). 

The warning of ver. 17 has the ring of Afostohc 
dignity. “From henceforth let no man give me trouble !” 
Paul speaks of himself as a sacred person, God’s mark 


29 


450 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





is upon him. Let men beware how they meddle with 
him. “He that toucheth you,” the Lord said to His 
people after the sorrows of the Exile, “toucheth the 
apple of Mine eye” (Zech. ii. 8). The Apostle seems 
to have had a similar feeling respecting himself. He 
announces that whosoever from this time lays an 
injurious hand upon him does so at his peril. Hence- 
Jorth—for the struggle with Legalism was the crisis 
of Paul’s ministry. It called forth all his powers, 
natural and supernatural, into exercise. It led him to 
his largest thoughts respecting God and man, sin and 
salvation ; and brought him his heaviest sorrows. The 
conclusion of this letter signalises the culmination of 
the Judaistic controversy, and the full establishment of 
Paul’s influence and doctrinal authority. The attempt 
of Judaism to strangle the infant Church is foiled. In 
return it has received at Paul’s hands its death-blow. 
The position won in this Epistle will never be lost; 
the doctrine of the cross, as the Apostle taught it, 
cannot be overthrown. Looking back from this point 
to “ prove his own work,” he can in all humility claim 
this ‘‘glorying in regard to himself” (ver. 4). He stands 
attested in the light of God’s approval as a good soldier 
of Christ Jesus. He has done the cause of truth an 
imperishable service. He takes his place henceforth 
in the front rank amongst the spiritual leaders of 
mankind. Who now will bring reproach against 
him, or do dishonour to the cross which he bears? 
Against that man God’s displeasure will go forth. 
Some such thoughts were surely present to the 
Apostle’s mind in writing these final words. They 
cannot but occur to us in reading them. Well done, 
we say, thou faithful servant of the Lord! Il] must 
it be for him who henceforth shall trouble thee, 


vi. 17, 18.] THE BRAND OF JESUS. 451 


“Troubles” indeed, and to spare, Paul had encoun- 
tered. He has just passed through the darkest 
experience of his life. The language of the Second 
Epistle to Corinth is a striking commentary upon this 
verse. ‘‘ We are pressed on every side,” he writes, 
“perplexed, pursued, smitten down” (ch. iv. 8, 9). 
His troubles came not only from his exhausting labours 
and hazardous journeys; he was everywhere pursued 
by the fierce and deadly hatred of his fellow-country- 
men. Even within the Church there were men who 
made it their business to harass him and destroy his 
work. No place was safe for him—not even the bosom 
of the Church. . On land or water, in the throngs of 
the city or the solitudes of the desert, his life was in 
hourly jeopardy (1 Cor. xv. 30; 2 Cor. xi. 26). 

Beside all this, “ the care of the Churches” weighed 
on his mind heavily. There was ‘‘no rest” either for 
his flesh or spirit (2 Cor. ii. 13; vii. 5). Recently 
Corinth, then Galatia was in a ferment of agitation. 
His doctrine was attacked, his authority undermined 
by the Judaic emissaries, now in this quarter, now in 
that. The tumult at Ephesus, so graphically described 
by Luke, happening at the same time as the broils in 
the Corinthian Church and working on a frame already 
overstrung, had thrown him into a prostration of body 
and mind so great that he says, “‘ We despaired even 
of life. We had the answer of death in ourselves” 
(2 Cor. i. 8, 9). The expectation that he would die 
before the Lord’s return had now, for the first time it 
appears, definitely forced itself on the Apostle, and cast 
over him a new shadow, causing deep ponderings and 
searchings of heart (2 Cor. v. I—10). The culmination 
of the legalistic conflict was attended with an inner crisis 
that left its ineffaceable impression on the Apostle’s soul, 


452 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 

But he has risen from his sick bed. He has been 
“comforted by the coming of Titus” with better news 
from Corinth (2 Cor. vii. 6—16). He has written 
these two letters—the Second to the Corinthians, and 
this to the Galatians. And he feels that the worst is 
past. “He who delivered him out of so great a death, 
will yet deliver” (2 Cor. i. 10). So confident is he in 
the authority which Christ gave and enabled him to 
exercise in utter weakness, so signally is he now 
stamped as God’s Apostle by his sufferings and achieve- 
ments, that he can dare any one from this time forth to 
oppose him. The anathema of this Epistle might well 
make his opponents tremble. Its remorseless logic left 
their sophistries no place of refuge. Its passionate 
entreaties broke down suspicion and sullenness. Let 
the Circumcisionists beware how they slander him. 
Let fickle Galatians cease to trouble him with their 
quarrels and caprices. So well assured is he for his 
part of the rectitude of his course and of the Divine 
approval and protection, that he feels bound to warn 
them that it will be the worse for those who at such a 
time lay upon him fresh and needless burdens. 

One catches in this sentence too am unuertone of 
entreaty, a confession of weariness. Paul is tired of 
strife. ‘Woe is me,” he might say, “ that I sojourn in 
Meshech, that I dwell among the tents of Kedar! My 
soul hath long had her dwelling with him that hateth 
peace.” “ Enmities, ragings, factions, divisions” —with 
what a painful emphasis he dwells in the last chapter on 
these many forms of discord. He has known them all. 
For months he has been battling with the hydra-headed 
brood. He longs for an interval of rest. He seems to 
say, ‘‘I pray you, let me be at peace. Do not vex me 
any more with your quarrels. I have suffered enough,” 





vi. 17, 18.] THE BRAND OF JESUS. 453 


The present tense of the Greek imperative verb 
(mapexétm) brings it to bear on the course of things 
then going on: as much as to say, ‘‘ Let these weapons 
be dropped, these wars and fightings cease.” For his 
own sake the Apostle begs the Galatians to desist from 
the follies that caused him so much trouble, and to 
suffer him to share with them God’s benediction of 
peace. 

But what an argument is this with which Paul en- 
forces his plea,—‘‘for I bear the brand of Jesus in 
my body!” 

“ The stigmata of Jesus”—what does he mean? It 
is “in my body”—some marks branded or punctured 
on the Apostle’s person, distinguishing him from other 
men, conspicuous and humiliating, inflicted on him as 
Christ’s servant, and which so much resembled the 
inflictions laid on the Redeemer’s body that they are 
called ‘“‘ the marks of Jesus.” No one can say precisely 
what these brands consisted in. But we know enough 
of the previous sufferings of the Apostle to be satisfied 
that he carried on his person many painful marks of 
violence and injury. His perils endured by land and 
sea, his imprisonments, his “ labour and travail, hunger 
and thirst, cold and nakedness,” his three shipwrecks, 
the “night and day spent in the deep,” were sufficient 
to break down the strength of the stoutest frame; they 
had given him the look of a worn and haggard man. 
Add to these the stoning at Lystra, when he was 
dragged out for dead. ‘ Thrice” also had he been 
beaten with the Roman rods; “five times” with the 
thirty-nine stripes of the Jewish scourge (2 Cor. xi. 
23—27). 

Is it to these last afflictions, cruel and shameful as 
they were in the extreme, that the Apostle specially 


454 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 
refers as constituting ‘“ the brand of Jesus”? For Jesus 
was scourged. The allusion of 1 Pet. ii, 24— by 
whose séripes (literally, bruise or weal) ye were healed” 
—shows how vividly this circumstance was remembered, 
and how strongly it affected Christian minds, With 
this indignity upon Him—His body lashed with the 
torturing whip, scored with livid bruises—our Blessed 
Lord was exposed on the cross. So He was branded 
as a malefactor, even before His crucifixion. And the 
same brand Paul had received, not once but many 
times, for his Master’s sake. As the strokes of the 
scourge fell on the Apostle’s shuddering flesh, he had 
been consoled by thinking how near he was brought to 
his Saviour’s passion: “The servant,” He had said, 
“shall be as his Lord.” Possibly some recent inflic- 
tion of the kind, more savage than the rest, had helped 
to bring on the malady which proved so nearly fatal to 
him. In some way he had been marked with fresh 
and manifest tokens of bodily suffering in the cause 
of Christ. About this time he writes of himself as 
“always bearing about in his body the dying of the 
Lord Jesus” (2 Cor. iv. 10); for the corpse-like state 
of the Apostle, with the signs of maltreatment visible in 
his frame, pathetically imaged the suffering Redeemer 
whom he preached. Could the Galatians have seen 
him as he wrote, in physical distress, labouring under 
the burden of renewed and aggravated troubles, their 
hearts must have been touched with pity. It would 
have grieved them to think that they had increased his 
afflictions, and were “ persecuting him whom the Lord 
had smitten.” 

His scars were badges of dishonour to worldly eyes. 
But to Paul himself these tokens were very precious. 
‘‘Now I rejoice in my sufferings for you,” he writes 


vi. 17, 18.] THE BRAND OF JESUS. 455 


from his Roman prison at a later time: “and am filling 
up what is lacking of the afflictions of Christ in my 
flesh” (Col. i. 24). The Lord had not suffered every- 
thing Himself. He honoured His servants by leaving 
behind a measure of His afflictions for each to endure 
in the Church’s behalf. The Apostle was companion 
of his Master’s disgrace. In him the words of Jesus 
were signally fulfilled: ‘‘They have hated Me; they 
will also hate you.” He was following, closely as he 
might, in the way that led to Calvary. All men may 
know that Paul is Christ’s servant; for he wears His 
livery, the world’s contempt. Of Jesus they said, 
“‘ Away with Him, crucify Him ;” and of Paul, “ Away 
with such a fellow from the earth: for it is not fit that 
he should live” (Acts xxii. 22). “Enough for the 
disciple to be as his Master:” what could he wish 
more ? : 

His condition inspired reverence in all who loved and 
honoured Jesus Christ. Paul’s Christian brethren were 
moved by feelings of the tenderest respect by the sight 
of his wasted and crippled form. ‘‘His bodily presence 
is weak (2 Cor. x. 10): he looks like a corpse!” said 
his despisers. But under that physical feebleness there 
lay an immense fund of moral vigour. How should he 
not be weak, after so many years of wearying toil and 
relentless persecution and torturing pain? Out of this 
very weakness came a newand unmatched strength; he 
“glories in his infirmities,” for there rests upon him the 
strength of Christ (2 Cor. xii. 9). 

Under the expression “ stigmata of Jesus” there is 
couched a reference to the practice of marking criminals 
and runaway slaves with a brand burnt into the flesh, 
which is perpetuated in our English use of the Greek 
words stigma and stigmatize. A man so marked was 


456 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 


called stigmatias, t.e., a branded scoundrel ; and such 
the Apostle felt himself to be in the eyes of men of the 
world. Captain Lysias of Jerusalem took him for an 
Egyptian leader of bandittii Honourable men, when 
they knew him better, learned to respect him; but 
such was the reputation that his battered appearance, 
and the report of his enemies, at first sight gained 
for him. . 

The term stigmata had also another and different 
signification, It applied to a well-known custom of 
religious devotees to puncture, or tattoo, upon them- 
selves the name of their God, or other sign expressive 
of their devotion (Isa. xliv. 5; Rev. iii, 12). This 
signification may be very naturally combined with 
the former in the employment of the figure. Paul’s 
stigmata, resembling those of Jesus and being of the 
same order, were signs at once of reproach and of con- 
secration. The prints of the world’s insolence were 
witnesses of his devotion to Christ. He loves to call 
himself “the slave of Christ Jesus.” The scourge has 
written on his back his Master’s name. Those dumb 
wounds proclaim him the bondman of the Crucified. 
At the lowest point of personal and official humiliation, 
when affronts were heaped upon him, he felt that he 
was raised in the might of the Spirit to the loftiest 
dignity, even as “Christ was crucified through weak- 
ness, yet liveth through the power of God” (2 
Cor. xiii. 4.) 

The words J dear—not united, as in our own idiom, 
but standing the pronoun at the head and the verb at 
the foot of the sentence—have each of them a special 
emphasis. J—in contrast with his opponents, man- 
pleasers, shunning Christ’s reproach ; and dear he says 
exultantly—“ this is my burden, these are the marks 


vi, 17, 18.1 THE BRAND OF JESUS. 487 
I carry,” like the standard-bearer of an army who 
proudly wears his scars (Chrysostom). In the pro- 
found and sacred joy which the Apostle’s tribulations 
brought him, we cannot but feel even at this distance 
that we possess a share. They belong to that richest 
treasure of the past, the sum of 


‘Sorrow which is not sorrow, but delight 
To hear of, for the glory that redounds 
Therefrom to human kind and what we are.” 


The stigmatization of Paul, his puncturing with the 
wounds of Jesus, has been revived in later times in a 
manner far remote from anything that he imagined or 
would have desired. Francis of Assisi in the year 
1224 A.D. received in a trance the wound-prints of the 
Saviour on his body ; and from that time to his death, 
it is reported, the saint had the physical appearance 
of one who had suffered crucifixion. Other instances, 
to the number of eighty, have been recorded in the 
Roman Catholic Church of the reproduction, in more 
or less complete form, of the five wounds of Jesus and 
the agonies of the cross; chiefly in the case of nuns. 
The last was that of Louise Lateau, who died in 
‘Belgium in the year 1883. That such phenomena 
have occurred, there is no sufficient reason to doubt. 
It is difficult to assign any limits to the power of the 
human mind over the body in the way of sympathetic 
imitation. Since St. Francis’ day many Romanist 
divines have read the Apostle’s language in this sense ; 
but the interpretation has followed rather than given 
rise to this fulfilment. In whatever light these mani- 
festations may be regarded, they are a striking witness 
to the power of the cross over human nature. Pro- 
tracted meditation on the sufferings of our Lord, aided 


458 THE EPISTLE T0 THE GALATIAN.Z. 

by a lively imagination and a susceptible physique, has 
actually produced a rehearsal of the bodily pangs and 
the wound-marks of Calvary. 

This mode of knowing Christ's sufferings “ after the 
flesh,” morbid and monstrous as we deem it to be, is 
the result of an aspiration which however misdirected 
by Catholic asceticism, is yet the highest that belongs 
to the Christian life. Surely we also desire, with Paul, 
to be “ made conformable to the death of Christ.” On 
our hearts His wounds must be impressed. Along the 
pathway of our life His cross has to be borne. To all 
His disciples, with the sons of Zebedee, He says, “ Ye 
shall indeed drink of My cup; and with the baptism 
that I am baptized withal shall ye be baptized.” But 
“it is the Spirit that quickeneth,” said Jesus; “ the 
flesh profiteth nothing.” The pains endured by the 
body for His sake are only of value when, as in Paul’s 
case, they are the result and the witness of an inward 
communion of the Spirit, a union of the will and the 
intelligence with Christ. 

The cup that He would have us drink with Him, is 
one of sorrow for the sins of men. His baptism is that 
of pity for the misery of our fellows, of yearning over 
souls that perish. It will not come upon us without 
costing many a pang. If we receive it there will be 
ease to surrender, gain and credit to renounce, self to 
be constantly sacrificed. We need not go out of our 
way to find our cross; we have only not to be blind 
to it, not to evade it when Christ sets it before us. It 
may be part of the cross that it comes in a common, 
unheroic form; the service required is obscure; it 
consists of a multitude of little, vexing, drudging sacri- 
fices in place of the grand and impressive saciifice, 
which we should be proud to make. To be martyred 


vi. 17, 18.] THE BRAND OF JESUS. 459 


by inches, out of sight—this to many is the cruellest 
martyrdom of all. But it may be Christ’s way, the 
fittest, the only perfect way for us, of putting His 
brand upon us and conforming us to His death. 

Yes, conformity of spirit to the cross is the mark of 
Jesus. “If we suffer with Him”—so the Apostolic 
Churches used to sing—‘‘we shall also be glorified 
together.” In our recoil from the artificial penances 
and mortifications of former ages, we are disposed in 
these days to banish the idea of mortification altogether 
from our Christian life. Do we not study our personal 
comfort in an un-Christlike fashion? Are there not 
many in these days, bearing the name of Christ, who 
without shame and without reproof lay out their plans 
for winning the utmost of selfish prosperity, and put 
Christian objects in the second place? How vain 
for them to cry ‘‘ Lord, Lord!” to the Christ who 
“pleased not Himself!” They profess at the Lord’s 
Table to “show His death;” but to show that death 
in their lives, to “know” with Paul “ the fellowship 
of His sufferings,” is the last thing that enters into 
their minds. How the scars of the brave Apostle put 
to shame the self-indulgence, the heartless luxury, the 
easy friendship with the world, of fashionable Christ- 
ians! “Be ye followers of me,” he cries, “as I also 
ef Christ.” He who shuns that path cannot, Jesus 
said, be My disciple. 

So the blessed Apostle has put his mark to this 
Epistle. To the Colossians from his prison he writes, 
“Remember my bonds.” And to the Galatians, 
“Look on my wounds.” These are his credentials; 
these are the armorial bearings of the Apostle Paul. 
He places the seal of Jesus, the sign-manual of the 
wourded hiind upon the letter written in His name. 


460 THE EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS. 





THE BENEDICTION. 


One benediction the Apostle has already uttered, in 
ver. 16. But that was a general wish, embracing all 
who should walk according to the spiritual rule of 
Christ’s kingdom. On his readers specifically he still 
has his blessing to pronounce. He does it in language 
differing in this instance very little from that he is 
accustomed to employ. 

“The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ” is the dis- 
tinctive blessing of the New Covenant. It is to the 
Christian the supreme good of life, including or carry- 
ing with it every other spiritual gift. Grace is Christ’s 
property. It descended with the Incarnate Saviour 
into the world, coming down from God out of heaven. 
His life displayed it; His death bestowed it on man- 
kind. Raised to His heavenly throne, He has become 
on the Father’s behalf the dispenser of its fulness to 
all who will receive it. There exalted, thence bestow- 
ing on men “ the abundance of grace and of the gift of 
righteousness,” He is known and worshipped as our 
Lord Jesus Christ. 

What this grace of God in Christ designs, what it 
accomplishes in believing hearts, what are the things 
that contradict it and make it void, this Epistle has 
largely taught us. Of its pure, life-giving stream the 
Galatians already had richly tasted. From “ Christ's 
grace” they were now tempted to “remove” (ch, i. 6). 
But the Apostle hopes and prays that it may abide 
with them. 

“With your spirit,” he says; for this is the place 
of its visitation, the throne of its power. The spirit 
of man, breathed upon by the Holy Spirit of God, 


vi. 17, 18.) THE BENEDICTION. 461 


receives Christ’s grace and becomes the subject and the 
witness of its regenerating virtue. This benediction 
contains therefore in brief all that is set forth in the 
familiar three-fold formula—“ the grace of our Lord 
Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion 
cf the Holy Ghost.” 

After all his fears for his wayward flock, all his 
chidings and reproofs, forgiveness and confidence are 
the last thoughts in Paul’s heart: ‘‘ Brethren” is the 
last word that drops from the Apostle’s pen,—followed 
only by the confirmation of his devout Amen. 


To his readers also the writer of this book takes 
leave to address the Apostle Paul’s fraternal benedic- 
tion: THE GRAcE oF our Lorp Jesus CHRIST BE WITH 
YOUR SPIRIT, BRETHREN. AMEN, 


REV. DR. HENRY B. SMITH’S WORKS. 
SYSTEMorCHRISTIAN THEOLOGY 


By Henry B. Smitu, D.D., LL.D. Edited by WM. S. Karr, D.D. 
Octavo vol. 650 pages. Cloth, (4th Edition.) $2.00. 


“The importance of this publication can hardly be 
over- estimated. Dr. Smith, while living, exerted an 
influence on Christian thought second to that of no 
one In this country. And to-day his opinions and ut- 
terances on points of Christian doctrine are quoted as 
of the highest authority.” 


“We hazard little in saying that Prof. Smith’s ‘System of Christian Theology’ will 
take its place at once in the very foremost rank of the great American treatises on 
dogmatics. Itis in a peculiar sense representative in its combination of keen analytical, 
philosophic power ann sail perception of the imperative wants of the human heart. 
. « . The book, as a whole, isa monument of profound Christian thought. No one 
could have composed it who was not impressed, as Prof. Smith was, with the supreme 
dignity and value of the science to which the best years of his life were devoted, and at 
the same time with the infinite possibilities of that sphere of divine knowledge into 
which this science aims to penetrate.”—W. Y. Evangelist. 

The Herald and Presbyter says: ‘‘There is no part of this work that is not a valu- 
able addition to the theological literature of the subject which it treats. The whole 
volume isa product of theological ability of the very first order, and of wide and thor- 
ough scholarship. . . . Itsstyle is clear and sparkling. In those portions of the 
work in which the theme is elaborated, it rises to heights of real eloquence. . . . 
We have been given an elaborate theological treatise, which must take a place abreas' 
of the ablest treatises in divinity to be found in our language.” 


INTRODUCTION TO CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY—LECTURES ON 


APOLOGETICS. By Henry B. SmituH, D.D. Edited by Wm. 
S. Karr, D.D. 2 vols. inone. Price reduced to $1.50. 


‘* As these two works properly belong together, it has been thought 
advisable to publish them as one volume, giving the author’s complete 
survey of the field, as well as his earlier and later treatment of some of 
the subjects.” 

“No teacher in this country, and few anywhere, hada more thorough acquaintance 
with this large and abstruse subject, and with its enormous literature. His severe and 
carefully trained logical faculty, his cool and dispassionate judgment, his extensive 
learning, and his nervous and transparent style, lend to this, as to all his other produc- 
tions, a profound interest anda peculiar charm. /¢ will de an invaluable manual, not 
only to the professional student, but to every thoughtful reader who seeks to justify the 
ways of God to man.” —N. Y. Tribune. 


HENRY BOYNTON SMITH—His Life and Work. Edited by his 
Wire. With a fine Portrait on steel by Ritchie. Octavo vol., 
cloth. $2.50. 


This Memoir of the lamented Prof. Smith gives a faithful picture of 
his character and public career. The story is deeply interesting, and 
while it fully justifies his reputation as one of the most accomplished 
scholars and theologians, it also shows him to have been a man of very 
rare personal attracticus. : p 

N.Y. Observer : “Dr. Smith’s life was full of incident and adventure, His education 
was splendid. Foreign travel in youth broadened his view, enlarged his acquaintance 
with universities, with men, books, and life. The brightest intellects discerned his great- 
ness. Asa pastor, preacher, teacher, lecturer and rofessor, as a reviewer and editor, 
he always made the mark ofa first-rate workman, doing everything well. The loving 
hand of the wife has fitly held out to the eyes of the world, and bound up in this bundle 
such evidence of his greatness and worth, that the present generation and posterity will 
know something of what the Church lost when this light went out before eventide.” 





Copies sent on receipt of price, post paid. 
A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 714 Broadway, New York. 


REV. DR. WM. M. TAYLOR’S WORKS. 


Contrary Winds and Other Sermons. 


Crown 8vo Volume, Cloth. $1.75 net. 3a Edition. 


** This work touches on numerous phases of life and thought and 
experience, showing that the author has lived through a vast deal and 
has been made the richer and stronger by it. It leaves the impression 
of wisdom that comes from actual experience, dealing with life rather 
than speculations, and so comes home to the heart and conscience. IT 
SHOWS A WIDE RANGE OF READING AND CLOSE GRAPPLE WITH THE 
DIFFICULT PROBLEMS OF OUR TIME. Such preaching is tonic and in- 
vigorating. It strengthens the heart and fortifies the will to overcome 
trials and conauer temptations and achieve victory.”—/V. Y. Christian 
al Work. 

The Congregationalist says: ‘‘Its variety of theme and the never. 
failing intellectual power which it illustrates, the author’s reverent posi- 
tiveness of faith, his broad and intimate knowledge of human nature, 
and the richness of his personal spiritual experiences—never obtruded 
but always underlying his words—render it a volume of rare and precious 
value to the Christian believer, and A CAPITAL SPECIMEN OF MANLY, 
BUSINESS-LIKE DISCUSSION TO ALL OTHERS WHO CARE TO READ 
WHAT A CHRISTIAN HAS TO SAY FOR HIS RELIGION.” 

4. Y. Churchman: ‘Sermons practical in their nature, full of 
deep thought and wise counsel. They will have as they deserve a wide 
circulation, 








Now Ready—4th Edition of 


ae LIMITATIONS OF LIFE 


AND OTHER SERMONS. 
By WM. M. TAYLOR, D.D. 


WITH A FINE PORTRAIT ON STEEL BY RITCHIE. CROWN 8vO 
VoLt., ExTRA CLOTH, $1.75. NET. 


“‘In variety of theme, in clearness and penetration of vision, in 
distinctness of aim, in intensity of purpose, in energy and well-directed 
effort, etc., this volume is perhaps without its equal in the language.” 

—The Scotsman. 

Providence Journal: ‘‘ The directness, earnestness, descriptive and 
illustrative power of the preacher, and his rare gift for touching the con- 
science and the heart, are fully exemplified in these eloquent discourses.” 

WV. Y. Evangelist: ‘‘ They have the noble simplicity and clearness 
of the truth itself, and which, fixing the attention of the reader from the 
beginning, holds it to the end. It is impossible to read them withouf 
the constant sense of the personality of the author.” 





Copies sent on receipt of price, post-paid. 


DR. BROADUS’S WORK ON PREACHING. 


ON THE PREPARATION AND DELIVERY OF SERMONS, 


By Joun A. Broapus, D.D., LL.D. 
Cloth, $1.75. 16th Edition. 


Bax~ No other work on the same subject, published in this country, has sold se 
largely in so short a time, while the religious and secular press, in all parts of the 








Crown 8vo. 514 pages. 


country, has almost universally commended it in strong and earnest notices. 

Its immediate REPUBLICATION IN LONDON, with an Introduction by Rev. Foseph 
Angus, D.D., was followed by the indorsement of Bishop Ellicott, Rev. C. H. Spurgeon, 
and the religious periodicals, demonstrating that it met with equal /aver abroad. 

The work not only meets the wants of students and young ministers, but is very 


suggestive and stimulating to those of maturer age. 


it is warmly commended to 


Sunday-school teachers, lay preachers and, public speakers in general. It takes 
unusual pains to give suggestions for the preparation and conduct of what is called 
extemporaneous discourse, while doing full justice to all the methods. 


NOTICES OF 


“Prepared by a very able teacher. He 
has had a practical knowledge of his sub- 
ject, is intimately acquainted with the lit- 
erature of all parts of it, and has treated 
the whole with devoutness, thoroughness, 
blended scholarship, and good sense.”— 
Dr. Angus, in Preface to London edition. 


“‘The preacher who desires to have an 
intelligent appreciation of the demands of 
his work, and of the way in which he may 
attain excellency in it, cannot do better 
than study this thoughtful and suggestive 
treatise.” —Lnglish Independent. 


“A book on preaching, by a master of 
the art. Everywhere in his book there is 
that intensity of earnestness which is at 
once the charm and characteristic of his 
preaching.” —Religrous Herald. 


“‘A judicious and exhaustive treatise— 
destined, we think, to occupy a very promi- 
nent, if not the highest place among 
books on Homiletics,”—Methodist Home 
Journal. 


‘‘Abounds in excellent hints, rules, and 
suggestions. It is very lucid in style— 
must do good on a large scale,” —Southern 
Presbyterian. 


“Tt bears the marks of close study, of 
careful deliberation, is always suggestive, 
breathes a good pure spirit, and has a style 
that is always clear and attractive,”— 
Lutheran and Missionary. 


THE WORK. 


—— — of the = a on the 
grandest subject.” — Raleigi piscopal 
Methodist. ‘ 

‘‘Elaborate in plan and execution, syste- 
matically arranged—we commend the vol- 
ume as one of the best of its kind,”—7ke 
Advance. 


‘*The most complete and comprehensive 
work of the kind published in this country.” 
— Christian Intelligencer. 

“A good book ; full of instruction, rich, 
varied, and exhaustive.” —Princeton Review. 

“T know of no one book from which a 
clergyman can learn so much of the art of 
preaching.”—W. Sparrow, D.D., Prof. in 
Prot. Epis. Theol. Seminary of Va. 2 

“«Even for the general reader it has un- 
usual attractions, It is exceedingly read- 
able and charmingly written.”- The World. 


‘*Sabbath-school superintendents and 
teachers will be guided, helped, and 
strengthened by it.”—S. School Times. 

“Tt abounds in suggestions which may 
be turned to profitable account, not only by 
preachers, but by lawyers, and all others 
who are called upon to address public au- 
diences.”—American Lit. Gazette. 


“*We have read the book with absorbing 


interest. Rich, deep thoughts and emi- 
nently practical estions abound 
through these pages.” Associate Reformed 
Presbyterian. 


Copies sent by mail on receipt of price. 


STANDARD RELICIOUS BOOKS. 
Che Clerical Library. 


HIS SERIES of volumes is specially intended for the CLERGY, STv- 
DENTS AND SUNDAY SCHOOL TEACHERS OF ALL DENOMINATIONS, 
and is meant to furnish them with stimulus and suggestion in the various 
departments of their work. Amongst the pulpit thinkers from whon 
these sermon outlines have been drawn are leading men of almost every 
denomination in Great Britain and America, the subjects treated of being 
of course practical rather than controversial. The best thoughts of the 
vest religious writers of the day are here furnished in a condensed form 
and at a moderate price. 
Eight volumes in crown 8vo are now ready (each volume complete in 
self). Price, $1.50. 
NOW READY—FOURTH EDITION. 
300 OUTLINES OF SERMONS ON THE NEW TESTAMENT. 


By 72 Eminent ENGLisH and AMERICAN CLERGYMEN, including 











Archbishop Tait. Canon LIDDON. |Rev. Dr. H. Crossy. 
Bishop ALEXANDER. |Canon WESTCOTT. |Rev. Dr. Pres. McCosH. 
Bishop BROWNE. Rey. Prin. CAIRNS. Rey. Dr. M.R. VINCENT. 
Bishop LicHtroot. |Rev. Dr. M. PuNsHON |Rev. Dr. JNO. PEDDIE. 
Bishop MAGEE. Rev. Dr. W. M.TayLor. |Rev. Dr. C. T. DEEMs, 
Bishop RYLE. Rey. PHILiips Brooks. |Rev. C. H. SPURGEON 
Dean CHURCH. Rey. Dr. R. S. Storrs. |Rev. Dean STANLEY. 
Dean VAUGHAN. Rev. Dr.W.G.T.SHEDD.|Rev. Dr. A. RALEIGH 
Canon FARRAR. Rev. Dr. T. L. CUYLER. And many others 
Canon Knox-LitTLe. |Rey. Dr. J. T. DURYEA. 





OUTLINES OF SERMONS ON THE OLD TESTAMENT. 


AUTHORS OF SERMONS. 
Canon LIDDON. 


G. S. BARRETT, B.A. 


J.OswaLpD DyxeEs,D.D. 


Dean E. BICKERSTETH.|E. HERBER EVANS. 
Bishop E. H. BRowNE.|Canon F.W. FARRAR. 


J. BALD. Brown, B.A. 
T.P. BouLTBEE, LL.D. 


J. P. CHown. 

Dean R.W. CHURCH. 
=. R. Couper, D.D. 
T. L. Cuvier, D.D. 


DoNALD FRASER, D.D. 
\J.G.GREENHOUGH,B.A. 
|W. F. Hook, D.D. 
Bishop W.BASIL JONEs. 
|JoHN Kerr, D.D. 
Canon EDWARD KING. 


A. B. Davipson, D.D.|Bp. J. B. LiGHTFoorT. 

Ropert Rainy, D.D. |W. M. Taytor, D.D. 
ALEX’R RALEIGH, D.D.|S. A. TIPPLE, B.A. 

C. P. RFICHEL, D.D. |H. J. VaNDyYKE, D.D. 
Cuas. STANFORD, D.D.|Dean C. J. VAUGHAN. 


J.A. MACFAYDEN,D.D, 
ALEX. MACLAREN,D.D, 
Bishop W. C. MAGEE. 
THEODORE MONOD. 
ARTHUR MURSELL. 
JosePH PARKER, D.D. 
Dean E. H. PLUMPTRE 
JoHN PutsrorD. [D.D 
W. MorLEY PUNSHON 
M. R. Vincent, D.D- 
W. J. Woops, B.A. 

C. WapDsworTH, D.D 
G. H. WILKINSON. 





Dean A. P. STANLEY. |JAMES VAUGHAN, B.A. 
W. M. StraTHAM, B.A. 





Bp. C. WORDSWORTH 


Copies sent by mail, postpaid, on receipt of price. 


THE CLERICAL LIBRARY—Continued). 


EXPOSITORY SERMONS AND OUTLINES ON 
THE OLD TESTAMENT, — 


Crown 8vo, cloth. $1.50. Being the 6th vol. of the Clerical Library. 





Containing Sermons by 
W. ALEXANDER, D.D.,| Pror. A. B. Davinson, | GEorGE Masemprd, BAR 


BisHop or Derry. D.D., LL.D. Josern Parker, D 

A. Barry, D.D., Primate | VeN.ARCHDEACON FarRRAR. | Dean J. J. S. PERowneE. 
OF AUSTRALIA, Canon W. J. Knox-Lrrrce, | C. Sranrorp, D.D. 

Dean BRADLEY, oF West- | Canon H. P. Lippon, D.D. | Lorp BisHop or CHESTER. 
MINSTER, ALEXANDER MAciaren,| Deas VAUGHAN, 

Storrorp A. Brooke, D.D. 


“* Rich in practical application, these Sermons will be an education and an in-**- 
vation to many.” —N, Y. CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE AND JOURNAL. 


PLATFORM AND PULPIT AIDS. 


CONSISTING OF STRIKING SPEECHES, HoME WorK, FOREIGN MISSIONS, 
THE BIBLE, SUNDAY SCHOOL, TEMPERANCE, AND KINDRED SuB- 
JECTS, WITH ILLUSTRATIVE ANECDOTES FROM ADDRESSES. Crown 
8vo, cloth. $1.50. Being the 7th vol. of the Clerical Library. 


By 
PREBENDARY AINSLIE. J. C. Epcumt, D.D. R Morrat, D.D. 
W. ARTHUR. DEAN OF BANGOR. Sir W. Murr, K.C.S,.1. 
BisHop oF BEDFoRD. BisHop Exticorr, D.D. J. Parker, D.D. 
DraAN OF CANTERBURY. ARCHDEACON FARRAR. W. M. Punsnon, D.D. 
3ISHOP OF CARLISLE. CANON FLEMING. Principat Ratny, D.D. 
Bishop Boyp CARPENTER. | NEWMAN HALL. C. H. SpurRGEoN. 
DEAN OF CHESTER. Dr. LivinGsToneE. A. Moopy Sruart, D.D. 
Dean CLosE. BisHop orf Lonpon. ArcupisHop Talrt. 
R. W. Date, D.D. J. A. Macrapyen, D.D. Canon TRISTRAM, 


And others. 

“* ust the book to give to some overworked pastor who has many speeches to make, 
with little time for study, and less money to spare for new books. We have here a 
collection of some of the best speeches of many of the great platform speakers of our 
time??—CHRISTIAN, 


ANECDOTES ILLUSTRATIVE OF OLD TESTA- 
MENT TEXTS. 


With over 500 Illustrations and Index of Texts. Crown 8vo, cloth. 
$1.50. Being the 8th vol. of the Clerical Library. 


“Tt will be found invaluable to all preachers, teachers, and public speakers, as 
placing at their command a vast storehouse of incidents with which to enforce and 
asten an tdea or point a moral,”—-N, Y, CHRISTIAN AT WORK, 


Copies sent by mail, postpaid, on receipt of price. 


THE CLERICAL LIBRARY-—(Continued). 


OUTLINES OF SERMONS TO CHILDREN, 


With numerous Anecdotes. Crown 8vo. Cloth, $1.50. (Being the 
3d vol. of the CLERICAL LIBRARY.) 


“* These sermons are by men of acknowledged eminence in possessing the happy 
faculty of preaching interestingly to the young. As an evidence of this, as well as 
of the character of the teaching, it is only necessary to mention such names as 
those of WILLIAM ARNOT, THE Bonars, PRINCIPAL CaiRNS, JOHN Epmonp, D.D., 
Drs. OswaLp Dykes avd J. MARSHALL LanG, desides many others.” —Canada Pres- 
byterian. 


«This book contains a very high grade of thinking, with enough illustrations and 
anecdotes to stock the average preacher for many years of children’s sermons,”—Zp7s- 
eopal Register. 


“‘They are full of suggestions which will be found exceedingly helpful ; the habit of 
using apt and simple illustrations, and of repeating good anecdotes, begets a faculty 
and power which are of value. This volume is a treasure which a hundred pastors will 
find exceedingly convenient to draw upon,”—WV. VY. Evangelist. 


PULPIT PRAYERS BY EMINENT PREACHERS. 


Crown 8vo. Cloth, $1.50. (Being the 4th vol. of the CLERICAL Liprary.) 


The British Quarterly says: ‘‘ These prayers are fresh and strong; the or- 
dinary ruts of conventional forms are left and the fresh thoughts of living hearts 
are uttered. The excitement of devotional thought and sympathy must be great in 
the offering of such prayers, especially when, as here, spiritual intensity and de- 
voutness are as marked as freshness and strength. Such prayers have their char- 
acteristic aavantages.” 





London Literary World; ‘‘Used aright, this volume is likely to be of great ser- 
vice to ministers, 1t will show them how to put variety, freshness and literary beauty, 
as well as spirituality of tone, into their extemporaneous prayers.” 


Anecdotes Illustrative of New Testament Texts. 


With 600 Anecdotes. Crown 8vo, 400 pages. Cloth, $1.50. (Being 
the 5th vol. of the CLERICAL LIBRARY.) 


London Christian Leader says: ‘‘ This is one of the most valuable books of 
anecdote that we have ever seen. There is hardly one anecdote that is not of first- 
rate quality. They have been selected by one who has breadth and vigor of mind 
as well as keen spiritual insight, and some of the most effective illustrations of 
Scripture texts hawe a rich vein of humor of exquisite quality.” 

The London Church Bells: “The anecdotes are given in the order of the texts 


which they illustrate. There isan ample index. The book is one which those who 
have to prepare sermons and addresses will do well to have at their elbow. 


N.Y. Christian at Work: ‘As AN APT ILLUSTRATION OFTEN PROVES THE NAIL 
WHICH FASTENS THE TRUTH IN THE MIND, THIS VOLUME WILL PROVE AN ADMIRABLE 
AND VALUABLE AID, NOT ONLY TO CLERGYMEN, BUT TO SUNDAY-SCHOOL TEACHERS 
AND CHRISTIAN WORKERS GENERALLY.” 

N.Y. Observer : ‘‘A book replete with incident and suggestion applicable to every 

= »” 
occasion, 


——EEEESSSSss——— 


Copics sent by mail, postpaid, on receipt of price. 


PREACHING AND PASTORAL WORK, 


1 Vol., Crown 8vo, Cloth, 540 Pages. Price $1.50. 


Homiletical and Pastoral Lectures. 


Delivered in St. Paul's Cathedral before the Church Homiletical Society 
With a Preface by the Rt. Rev. C. J. ELLICOTT, D.D., 
Editor of New Testament Commentary for English Readers. 7 


CONTENTS. 
The Preparation of a Sermon. 
By the LORD BISHOP or ROCHESTER. 
The End or Object of a Sermon. 
By the Right Rev. BISHOP RYAN, D.E 
Homely Hints on Preaching. 
By the Very Rev. DEAN HOWSON, D.P. 
On the Emotions in Preaching. 
By the LORD ARCHBISHOP of YORK. 
What Constitutes a Plain Sermon. 
By the LORD BISHOP of CARLISLE. 
The Preparation of Sermons for Village Co tions. 
By the Rev. CANON HEURTLEY, D.D. 
The Preacher’s Gifts. 
By the Rev. E. GARBETT, M.A. 
Study in its Bearing on Preaching. 
By the Rev. CANNON BARRY, D.D., D.C.L. 
The Study of Holy Scripture with a view to the Preparation of 
Sermons. By the Very Rev. DEAN PEROWNE, D.D. 
Texts: their Interpretation, Misinterpretation and Misapplica« 
tion. By the Ven. ARCHDEACON PEROWNE, B.D. 
Prophecy in its Relation to ee 
By the Very. Rev. DEAN FREMANTLE, D.D. 
Parish Work in its Relation to the Cure of Souls. 
By the Rev. CANON BERNARD, M.A. 
Pastoral Visitation. 
By the Rev. PREBENDARY CADMAN, M.A, 
Pastoral Dealings with Individuals. 
By the Rev. CANON HOW, M.A. 
Cottage Lectures. 
By the BISHOP of OSSORY. 
How to Reach Working Men. 
By the Rev. PREBENDARY MACDONALD, M.A 
Parochial Temperance Work as Part of the Cure of Souls. 
y the Rev. CANON ELLISON, M.A. 
The Temptations of the Ministry. 
By the LORD BISHOP of RANGOON. 
The Responsibilities of the Ministry. 
By the Rev. F. PIGOU, D.D. 
The Results of the cer or 
By the Rev. CANON HOARE, M.A, 





Copies sent by mail, postpaid, on receipt of price. 
4 


STANDARD RELICIOUS WORKS. 


Sacred History from the Creation to the Giving ofihe Law. 


By Rey. E. P. Humpnrey, D. D., LL.D., of Louisville, Ky., and sometime 
Professor of Biblical and Church History in Danville Theological Sem- 
inary. Large octavo, 550 pages, cloth, $2.50. 

‘¢ This treatise bears witness to the author’s thorough acquaintance with 
his theme, resulting from a careiul study of every verse and line of the Bible 

earing upon it, and from acomprehensive reading of the literature on all 
sides of the subject. It cannot fail to delight as well the theoiogian and 
scholar as the ordinary reader. Its style, though of course didactic, is 
neither cumbersome nor magisterial, but pleasing, elegant, and persuasive. 

The order followed in the arrangement of the matter is perfect ; the double 

' index of topics and texts referred to or interpreted is thorough and com- 

plete. Zhe book itself is avery armory of weapons, all of the most modern 

date. Every line of the book teems with interest and instruction.’’—New 

York Churchman. 

‘© A solid body of old-fashioned learning and orthodox divinity, that will 
delight thousands of readers who like the old ring of the ‘ripe scholar.’ 
Two good indexes of topics and texts equip the work for further usefulness. 
Apart from tts claim to be history in the strict sense of the word, the work 
ts one of the best we are familiar with for those who wish to keep substan- 
tially unaltered the traditional view of human history from Adam to Moses. 
One cannot read Dr. Humphreys book without edification and enjoyment 
of his lucid style.”’—New York Critic. 

‘¢ A careful perusal of this book will bring welcome assistance to preach- 
ers of the Word who wish to broaden and deepen their comprehension of 
Divine truth ; it will bring fresh suggestions to careful and devout students 
of the Bible, and it will clear away the mists from the vision of many seri- 
ous and candid doubters.” —Chvistian Standard. 

“© Here are results of study, of profound thought, of ripe scholarship, of 
unswerving loyalty to the Word, such as are not excelled in any other work 
we know. His book, we are sure, will satisfy every one who truly hungers 
for sacred knowledge. Lt is eminently a book for the time, and such a work 
by such a hand is worthy to stand on every study-table by the Bible and 
concordance.’’—Cincinnati Herald and Presbyter. 


THE SYSTEM OF THEOLOGY 


Contained in the Westminster Shorter Catechism. Opened and Explained 
by Rev. Drs. A. A. and J. ASPINWALL HopGE. 12mo, $1.00. 

** Many will be glad to have in a book of less than two hundred pages a 
clear exposition of the doctrines taught by this Church; it is intended as a 
text-book inthe home, in the Sabbath-schools, and in our seminaries,” —N.Y. 
Observer. 

*¢ This volume may be read with profit by Christians of any school of the- 
ology.” —Methodist Record. 

-* There is enough theology in this compact little book to satisfy the most 
exacting reader.’’"—Philadelphia Press. 


THE DAWN OF THE MODERN MISSION. 


By Rev. Wm. Fremine Stevenson, D. D., author of “Praying and Waiting.” 12mo 
vol., cloth, go cts. 
Copies sent by matl, post-paid, on receipt of price. 


A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 714 Broadway, New York. 





pies STANDARD RELICIOUS WORKS. 
New and Enlarged [4th | Edition, in Cheaper Form, 


CHARLES [. BRAGES GESTA CHRIST 


A HISTORY OF HUMANE PROGRESS UNDER CHRIS. 
TIANITY. With New Preface and Supplemen- 
tary Chapte, 540 pp., cloth. 
Price reduced from $2.50 to $1.50. 


“It is especially adapted to assist the clergyman and religious teacher in his strug- 
gles with honest, thoughtful infidelity.” ‘ 

“It presents a storehouse of facts bearing on the influences of Christianity upon 
such important topics as the paternal power, the position of woman under custom and 
law, personal purity, and marriage, slavery, cruel and licentious sports, anc all matters 
of humanity and compassion, etc. ‘THE THOUGHTFUL READER WILL HERE GATHER IN- 
FORMATION WHICH COULD ONLY BE OBTAINED FROM LIBRARIES OR MANY VOLUMES,” 


Rev. Dr. R. S. STORES says: “IT IS A BOOK THAT 
DESERVES THE VERY WIDEST CIRCULATION FOR ITS CAREFUL- 
NESS AND CANDOR, iTS AMPLE LEARNING, its just, discrimina- 
ting analysis of historical movements as initiated or governed by 
moral forces, and for the fine spirit which pervades it.” 


“The skill and industry with which Mr. Brace has gleaned and sorted the vast ac- 
cumulation of material here gathered together, the better to show forth the power and 
influence, direct and indirect, of Christ’s teachings, is not only praise-worthy, but even 
ina certain sense wonderful. He has a complete mastery of his subject, and many 
chapters in the book are of exceeding value and interest.”—London Morning Post. 


A NEW and REVISED EDITION, with NEW MAPS and ILLUSTRATIONS, 


STANLEY'S SINAT AND PALESTINE. 


In Connection with their History. By Dean A. P. STANLEY. 
With 7 Elaborate and Beautifully Colored 
Maps, and other Illustrations. 


Large Crown 8vo Vol., Cloth, 640 pp. Price reduced Srom $4 to $2.50. 


The late Dean Stanley published a new and revised edition of his 
‘*SINAI AND PALESTINE.” In it he made considerable additions and cor 
rections, giving the work the final impress of his scholarship, taste and 
ability. This edition has been carefully conformed to the last English 
edition—including the new maps and illustrations, and is herewith com- 
mended anew AS THE MOST READABLE AS WELL AS THE 
MOST ACCURATE WORK ON THE SUBJECT IN THE ENG- 
LISH LANGUAGE. 

Rev. Dr. H. M. Field, Editor of ‘‘N. Y. Evangelist,” says of Stanley's “ Sinai 
and Palestine”: ‘* We had occasion for its constant use in crossing the desert, and in 
journeying through the Holy Land, and can bear witness at once to its accuracy and to 
the charm ofits descriptions. Of all the helps we had it was by far the most cap 
tivating.” 

Copies sent by mail on receipt of price. 
A. C, ARMSTRONG & SON, 714 Broadway, New York. 
A 


THE SERMON BIBLE. 


EMBRACING THE WHOLE OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, 


Completion of the Old Testament. Ju Four Volumes. 
NOW READY. 


_ ast Vol.—ConTAtniInG GENESIS TO SAMUEL. | 3d Vol.—ConTAINING PSALM 77TH TO SOLOMON. 
_ 2d Vol.—Contarninc Kincs To PsaLm 76TH. | 4th Vol—ConrtaininG IsataH TO MaLacut. 


Each Volume (complete in itself) contains upward of 500 Sermon Outlines and 
‘Several thousand References, with 24 Blank Pages (in each Vol.) for Notes. Bound 
in half buckram cloth. Price $1.50 each. 

THis SERIES OF VoLuMES will give in convenient form the 

_ essence of the best homiletic literature of this generation. As 
yet, the preacher desirous cf knowing the best that has been 
said on a text has had nothing to turn to but a very meagre 
and inadequate Homiletical Index. In this he is often referred 
to obsolete or second-rate works, while he misses references to 
the best sources. The new SERMoN BiBte will take account of 
the best and greatest preachers, and will be compiled from 
Manuscript reports and fugitive periodical sources as well as 
from books. Many of the best sermons preached by eminent 
men are never printed in book form. It will thus contain much 
that will be new to its readers, 


UNDER EVERY TEXT WILL BE GIVEN :— 


1. Outlines of important sermons by eminent preachers existing only 
in manuscript or periodicals, and thus inaccessible. 

2. Less full outlines of sermons which have appeared in volumes which 
are not well known or easily obtained. 

3. References to or very brief outlines of sermons which appear in 
popular volumes such as are likely to be in a preacher's library. 

4. full references to theological treatises, commentaries, etc., where any 
help is given to the elucidation of the text. 


Thus the preacher, having chosen his text, has only to refer to the SERMON 
BiBLE, to find some of the best outlines and suggestions on it and full refer- 
ences to all the helps available. 

The range of books consulted will be far wider than in any Homiletical 
Index—we cannot say than in any work of the kind, because no work of the 
_ Kind is in existence. 

_ The Series will be under the general supervision of the Editor of the 

‘Clerical Library,” who will be assisted by specialists in each department. 


It will extend to 12 vols., of about 500 pages, with 24 blank pages for 
memorandum notes at end of each vol. Price $1.50 each, and will be pub. 
lished at the rate of at least two vols. a year. 


Great care will be taken to observe due proportion in the volumes—the 

| space given to each book of the Bible depending on the number of sermons 
t have been preached from it. 

_ As the volumes will be INDISPENSABLE TO EVERY PREACHER, and as they 

| will be in constant use, they will be issued well bound, and at an exceecingly 

_ moderate price when the amount of matter is considered. 


CAHies sent, postpaid, on receipt of price, by 
A.C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 7/4 Broadway, N. Y. 














‘7 


at Nov 1 7 


(APR 1 6 
MAK 


APR 


MAY 10 


sje 
a 2 
DEC 7 


0 =a 
ATA LY 
aa na : 

+ 

: 


APR 02 


OAR U 


Demco 38-297 


Date Due 


APR1i2 
OCT 


i wee) 
« : 


— 
| 








é i" 
ee 
vy my aa 
: 
‘ 
ig ry 
‘ 
ay 
" 
3 
‘ ; ' 
" % 
rt rs 
bule 
‘ le xray 
. “ i - 
ts Pe Wade 
ae . ov 
a 
’ tik + 
has 
i Py agri a? 
; - BY So , 
ise 
J \ ye? 


Dawes. 227.4 F4IS4EA 
Findlay 


Epistle to the Galatians 


Div. S. 


aon 
Pact <) fe 4 











